[SURBL-Discuss] Whitelist all Bonded Senders?
Chris Santerre
csanterre at merchantsoverseas.com
Tue Sep 7 17:37:49 CEST 2004
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc at surbl.org]
>Sent: Saturday, September 04, 2004 5:04 AM
>To: SURBL Discuss
>Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Whitelist all Bonded Senders?
>
>
>On Saturday, September 4, 2004, 2:01:05 AM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
>>> >> How about www.senderbase.org ?
>
>>> > I would not go that way, people can test on
>senderbase/bonded sender, and
>>> > just like habaes this will be abused also. In my SA setup
>the above scores
>>> > are also taken, and will bias the score...
>
>>> Are any of them grey? Bonded sender claims they have paid out
>>> only tiny amounts of bonds due to violations.
>>>
>>> Remember that not everyone uses SA. I'd like to have a list of
>>> non-spammers to exclude from SURBLs.
>
>> I have requested rsync access on the zones, they have
>responded to that
>> and we will setup a feed, afterwards i can have a look on
>the zones, and
>> check a little better. More indepth...
>
>Sounds perfectly reasonable. We can check if any of their
>customers hit our lists.
>
>Are there any other nominally whitehatting organizations
>we could check into? Are there any real whitehat
>certification groups?
Anyone who mentions DMA will be introduced to my hockey stick!
Just want to make sure we are all clear on that one ;)
-note- DMA = Direct Marketers Assoc. = the evil empire
--Chris
More information about the Discuss
mailing list