[SURBL-Discuss] whitelist senderbase top domains?

[Alex Broens]

Jeff Chan wrote:

> On Thursday, September 9, 2004, 4:27:49 AM, Alex Broens wrote:
> 
>>I'd exclude:
>>-----------------
>>dartmail.net
>>bezeqint.net
>>havagreatday.com
>>ohthatsfunny.com
>>prod-infinitum.com.mx
>>imgmailer.com
>>blueyonder.co.uk
>>webhostplus.com
>>hinet.net
>>-------------------
> 
> 
>>Pls don't ask me to justify. To me they're either black, dark grey or 
>>abused or don't care if.....
> 
> 
>>Alex
> 
> 
> I guess you took a different snapshot of those domains than I
> did.  Of the ones you mention, only:
> 
> 
>>bezeqint.net
>>blueyonder.co.uk
>>hinet.net
>>prod-infinitum.com.mx
> 
> 
> Are on my copy of the list and not already excluded as spammers.
> 
>   http://spamcheck.freeapp.net/whitelists/senderbase-isps
> 
> These remaining ones are all large ISPs.  They almost certainly
> have been abused briefly to send spams.  But that's not
> the question.  The question is should we allow their own
> domain names to be blocked when mentioned in messages?
> 
> How many spammers include the URI of their ISP in
> their spams?  Is that a useful thing for them to do?
> Probably not, but even if they did, would we want to block on
> those ISP domain names?


I don't see them as "abused briefly"
personally I seem them as a plague and as 99% free webmailers indirectly 
or diretly contribute to the SCAM/SPAM/Trash floods.

If "free" web mail would cost $5/annum, Nigeria would have to search for 
new export products.

if Open Relays, Zombies, Bogons, Spamhauses etc are a source
of spam... IMHO the list aboves rates a new category.

Alex