[SURBL-Discuss] The grey area (was: Leaving SURBL)
jeffc at surbl.org
Thu Apr 7 07:57:22 CEST 2005
On Wednesday, April 6, 2005, 10:37:47 PM, SM wrote:
> The discussion here is more about what to do about bystanders who are used
> to send out spam.
No, because SURBLs are not sender lists, but I see your point
> Most antispam techniques are quite effective at the
> beginning. That rate drops as spammers come up with ways to circumvent the
> technique. SURBL has introduced a grey area where redirectors are used to
> send out a url. Given SURBL's listing policy, these domains won't be
> listed as it causes false positives. There is no incentive for domains
> which fall in the grey area to fix their redirectors.
Sure there is. Do they like having the servers hit with millions
of spam redirections? Those cost resources and don't get them
legitimate click throughs or whatever. It's just abuse of their
systems by spammers.
Many of the organizations that have been contacted about their
open redirectors being used in spams have attempted to fix them
with varying degrees of success. But most realize it's abuse
and wasting their resources and at least try to do something
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
More information about the Discuss