[SURBL-Discuss] RE: hotnudiegirls.com URI as false positive

Chris Santerre csanterre at MerchantsOverseas.com
Wed Nov 24 22:02:17 CET 2004

1) Dude that is one hell of a cool domain name for a non pron site! Cool!!
2) quasirhombicosidodecahedron.com also rocks as a domain name!
3) Your original complaint, doesn't exhist :)

You are NOT listed. Something is up. We have seen these more then a few
hotnudiegirls.com is not listed in ANY SURBL. 


to check it out. 	

I have no idea if it is corrupt cache data, or some sort of goofyness in the
SA code. Is it possible we have a FUBAR SURBL mirror?

I've cc'd just about anyone having any clue to help. This is about the 4th
report in 3 days. 


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Samat Jain [mailto:samat at quasirhombicosidodecahedron.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 2:23 PM
>To: postmaster at outblaze.com; whitelist at surbl.org
>Subject: hotnudiegirls.com URI as false positive
>When sending an e-mail to myself, I apparently got my message 
>tagged as spam 
>with SpamAssassin:
> 3.9 URIBL_SC_SURBL         Contains an URL listed in the SC 
>SURBL blocklist
>                            [URIs: hotnudiegirls.com]
> 2.0 URIBL_OB_SURBL         Contains an URL listed in the OB 
>SURBL blocklist
>                            [URIs: hotnudiegirls.com]
>These were picking up my website (whose tagline I've removed 
>from this e-mail) 
>URL that is in the signature of all my e-mail messages.
>My domain is not an origin of spam, nor has it ever, or any source of 
>questionable material. It is a personal domain used only for 
>hosting some 
>services and ONE website that I keep on the signature portion 
>of my e-mails.
>Thank you,
>Samat Jain
>Flap's Law: Any inanimate object, regardless of its position, 
>or purpose, may be expected to perform at any time in a 
>totally unexpected 
>manner for reasons that are either entirely obscure or else completely 
>-- Anonymous (586)

More information about the Discuss mailing list