[SURBL-Discuss] Re: Pruning dead domains

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Fri Jun 25 20:41:27 CEST 2004

On Friday, June 25, 2004, 6:17:27 PM, Frank Ellermann wrote:
> Jeff Chan wrote:
>> I have removed Bill's list of dead domains from all SURBLs.
>> That should reduce all lists in size somewhat.

> Are you sure that this is a good idea ?  After all SURBL is a
> way to identify spam, and stupid spammers spamvertize "dead"
> domains.  Or they create 1 domain per spam run and don't care
> how fast it's "dead".  Rogue registrars like DirectI probably
> have this procedure on auto-pilot, including their "we'll look
> into this" delay tactics.

I agree with your point that if spammers continue to use
dead domains in their spams we could continue to block on
them, but I think several factors could influence that:

1.  Unusable domains do spammers no good.  They probably
don't have much incentive to keep including them since
they would send people to a site that doesn't work.

2.  There will be quite a bit of latency in our
removing dead domains.  The delay will probably
let them expire out of use in spams also.

FWIW They're not actually removed; they're suppressed with a
whitelist.  So we can easily restore them if needed by taking
them off the whitelist.

Pruning these lets us reduce the size of our lists quite a bit
which is generally a good thing for practical reasons.

Jeff C.

More information about the Discuss mailing list