[SURBL-Discuss] Fwd: Re: ANTI-SURBL technique used by spammer

[Chris Santerre]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn [mailto:raymond at prolocation.net]
>Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 5:32 AM
>To: Jeff Chan; SURBL Discussion list
>Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Fwd: Re: ANTI-SURBL technique used by
>spammer
>
>
>Hi!
>
>> I brought it up due to the possible bad uses of this 
>technology.  It's
>> possible for a spammer to use this service for free 
>bandwidth for images and
>> other content (flash, etc).
>> 
>> This is just one of those things to hold on to and keep an 
>eye out for, if
>> the word get's out, the spammers might try and abuse it.  
>From the message
>> boards, most people don't care what it's used for, except 
>those using 40 GB
>> per day in illegal movie downloads cause they choose to be a mirror.
>
>> >> Are you aware of http://freecache.org ?
>> >> Take a look here if not:
>> >> http://slashdot.org/articles/04/05/12/1635205.shtml?tid=126&tid=95
>> >> Thanks!
>
>We might tell them about SURBL and ask to implement caching 
>only for non 
>listed domains. Others implemented things like that allready. 
>Jeff, can 
>you take that actionpoint?
>
>Bye,
>Raymond.

I think that is a fantastic idea! They want there service to be great. It
can't be if they are blacklisted. I second the motion to contact them. Can't
hurt.

--Chris