[SURBL-Discuss] Feedback on adprofile.net wanted

List Mail User track at Plectere.com
Wed May 11 04:07:02 CEST 2005


>...
>
>adprofile.net reportedly appeared in a flowers.com ham as:
>
><td align="middle"><a href="http://tx.adprofile.net/tx/r?CID=12&M=3&sid=800ABC123"><IMG height=90
>src="http://a1234.g.akamai.net/f/1233/1234/1a/www.1800flowers.com/800f_assets/images/flowers/images/banners/swift me
>too120X90.gif" width="120" NOSEND="1" border="0"></a></td>
>
>Yet it's listed on WS by Bill Stearns.   This may be a false
>positive.  Does anyone have any more information about it?
>
>Catherine Hampton says it's not on her spam radar and others
>have said that they may be web spammers on guestbooks, wikis,
>etc. but not email spammers.  They seem to have some minor
>NANAS.
>
>Feedback wanted.  :-)
>
>Jeff C.
>--
>Don't harm innocent bystanders.
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.surbl.org
>http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

	Slime, but not an email spammer to my knowledge - They do redirect
you (always) through portland.co. uk, who is slime also (and worse, but
still not an email spammer as far as I know).  BTW, they both will gladly
sell your name, email address and IP (and probably whatever else they can
collect).

	Chris, if your reading this, you should now have two more "grey"
entries for URIBL;  But these both seem like FPs for SURBL.

	Paul Shupak
	track at plectere.com

P.S.  This is probaly the wrond list, but for those using URIBL, what scores
are you using (mine are pretty low)?  Reply on the URIBL list if it seems
more appropriate (likely it is).


More information about the Discuss mailing list