[SURBL-Discuss] "surgically" blocking certain redirectors
jeffc at surbl.org
Wed Apr 27 02:02:05 CEST 2005
On Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 7:56:17 AM, Rob McEwen wrote:
> Jeff said:
> "It is possible to blacklist nina.18.to but not 18.to if nina is owned by
> spammers but 18 is not."
> Why not then add certain redirectors to the SURBL lists where the redirector
> is deemed to NOT be found in hams? Specifically, I'm referring to situations
> where we could list redirect.somedomain.com but NOT list somedomain.com
> Rob McEwen
Sure, if we find a redirector owned and operated purely by
spammers (as opposed to clueless ISPs, etc.) then we can
certainly blacklist it.
So far I don't recall seeing any that fit that category, but if
spammers do start running their own redirectors we an absolutely
"If it appears in hams, then don't list it."
More information about the Discuss