csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com
Mon Nov 8 17:14:40 CET 2004
So what was the outcome?
That's right, I'm back! For 2 days anyway. I'm much happier and poorer from
my vacation! But I did manage to pickup a BFG 6800 OC video card while I was
away ;) WOOOT!!! Fragfest!
(Yes I did OC the OC a bit more!)
(I firmly believe if Disney shaped dog poo into the Mickey shape, My wife
would want to buy it!)
>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc at surbl.org]
>Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 8:07 PM
>To: SURBL Discussion list
>Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] LT02.NET
>On Thursday, October 28, 2004, 1:41:43 PM, Fred Fred wrote:
>> Can someone tell me why LT02.NET is whitelisted? (don't
>tell me cause it's
>> in ham) I would like an example if possible.
>> They use open relays to send their spam, the have 8 nanas
>hits, the domain
>> is fairly new like 2004-08-06
>> Hand checked, it does not look like a legit site. (main
>page is just a
>> remove form.)
>> I played around and found that if you visit:
>> it will redirect you to www.listrak.com which is also
>> has 31 nanas hits).
>> Their mx record is an open relay, I think this is a very
>> to whitelist.
>First, we're not an open relay database. Our concern is spam URI
>Second, lt02.net was whitelisted by Steve Champeon, whose
>anti-spam abilities I trust. Steve, would you care to comment
>on this one?
>> steve of hesketh.com
>> Has whitelisted: lt02.net
>> Found on SURBL lists: WS OB
>> Justification is:
>> 'Found in possibly legit PRNewswire mailing.'
>> Ticket is:
>> Timestamp: Tue Sep 14 17:50:25 UTC 2004
>Regarding listrak.com, I whitelisted it, probably because it
>appeared in newsletters from legitimate companies.
>I'm interested in seeing examples of spam and ham mentioning
>"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.surbl.org
More information about the Discuss