Discuss

discuss@lists.surbl.org

2 participants
1873 discussions

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] FPs - cooler email dot com and icebase dot co m
by Chris Santerre 28 Jul '04

28 Jul '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 5:35 PM >To: SURBL Discussion List >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] FPs - cooler email dot com and icebase dot >com > > >On Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 7:53:50 AM, Steven Champeon wrote: >> Both of these are associated with Strong Week, a legit >"what's going on" >> newsletter received by one of my users here. > >I see cooleremail dot com and icebase dot com on ws.surbl.org and >have whitelisted them in SURBLs. We should ask Chris or Bill to >see why they are getting onto ws and try to correct that. > >Jeff C. > I reported these on the 23rd. But.....what the....? How come everytime I go back and look at these I say to myself, this shouldn't have been added? I checked these buy hand, but there doesn't apear to be sufficient data to support being listed for either. It appears that these were submissions from the web report. And the actuall emails Looked VERY spammy. Which is why they got listed. And it could have been a spam run that they dump the customer. Could....but maybe not. I say remove them both for now, and watch them. NANAS would have me think they are not spammers. But they *may* get fooled byt heir own customers every now and then. I will remove from submisions. --Chris

1 0

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Death By DNS
by Rob McEwen 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

sm said: > If the DNS server is slow, it will cause problems. If you are going to use > DNS based blacklists, you should have a reliable DNS server. While I generally agree with this statement, I would add that that reliability and speed are not always a "yes/no", or "good/bad" thing. There are some grey areas or varying degrees of responsiveness and speed and, definitely, using blacklists in the way that SURBL does puts a new level of burden or stress on DNS servers. For example, if a DNS server is generally good, but does have a 12 millisecond response time (using an arbitrary number) due to being shared among dozens (or hundreds) of other servers, this 12 milliseconds gets multiplied out when a dozen SURBL lookups hit at practically the same instant. In this case, the message is dependent on ALL of these requests being answered before the message can continue. This can also cause the mail server to have to work more threads at any one given time... which can lead to additional scalability and performance issues. Therefore, many DNS server situations which are more than adequate for regular situations may not be adequte for SURBL lookups. Rob McEwen

4 4

I figured it out!!!!
by David Groce 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

Man do I feel dumb. The day before I decided to tackle the CPAN install of Spamassassin, I had downloaded a rule from exit0.us (BodyRules.cf) it was an odd download since the page that displays it was a PHP page, so I went through and cleaned out all the extra html, but apparently didn't do a very good job. So I added the rules I had been using one by one and running spamassassin --lint to find out what was breaking it, and sure enough the error: > Scalar found where operator expected at (eval 17) line 686, near "} $self" > (Missing operator before $self?) > Failed to run header SpamAssassin tests, skipping some: syntax error at > (eval 17) line 686, near "} $self" was coming from the BodyRules.cf file. I have also updated my LWP through cpan and I get no errors, so I'm off to test my maildroprc file to see if I can get this mail server back into shape. I appreciate all the help. David Groce CCNA Network Server Analyst/Coordinator North Kitsap School District (360) 394-2621 dgroce(a)nksd.wednet.edu

1 0

FPs - getty images dot com and moz dev dot org
by Steven Champeon 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

Guys, why is getty images dot com listed in SURBL? Or moz dev dot org? -- hesketh.com/inc. v: +1(919)834-2552 f: +1(919)834-2554 w: http://hesketh.com Buy "Cascading Style Sheets: Separating Content from Presentation, 2/e" today! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/159059231X/heskecominc-20/ref=nosim/

3 6

FP: cmp events dot com
by Steven Champeon 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

Did something change over the past couple days? I'm getting 3-5 FPs a day off multi. -- hesketh.com/inc. v: +1(919)834-2552 f: +1(919)834-2554 w: http://hesketh.com Buy "Cascading Style Sheets: Separating Content from Presentation, 2/e" today! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/159059231X/heskecominc-20/ref=nosim/

2 2

FPs - cooler email dot com and icebase dot com
by Steven Champeon 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

Both of these are associated with Strong Week, a legit "what's going on" newsletter received by one of my users here. -- hesketh.com/inc. v: +1(919)834-2552 f: +1(919)834-2554 w: http://hesketh.com Buy "Cascading Style Sheets: Separating Content from Presentation, 2/e" today! http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/159059231X/heskecominc-20/ref=nosim/

2 2

Death By DNS
by Rob McEwen 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

RE: Death By DNS I never mentioned this before, but these extra lookups can be like firecrackers going off. I do three types of DNS lookups: (1) basic RBL checking of sending server's IP address using sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org (2) content RBL lookup for domains and IP addresses using multi.surbl.org (3) content RBL lookup for IP addresses (not domains) using sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org (BTW - Does anyone have a "feel" for sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org and false positives. I wonder sometimes if that particular RBL list is too strict?) Anyway, the second and third of these two levels can sometimes cause several DNS lookups per one singe message. Eventually, I noticed that my server was slowing down. Web sites were being served slower. Also, my mail server software is NOT know for robustness and several articles on their user's group site mention that it falters if the DNS server is slow or has any problems. So I thought... could there be a connection? My next "project" was to then improve the DNS caching on my Windows 2000 server. I tried to tweak the client DNS caching, but with little success/options. Next, I looked into installing the full Windows 2000 DNS service... but I'm not a network engineer and the settings seemed strange and the instructions confusing. Finally, I found the answer. I found a 3rd party "caching" DNS server which works great for my purposes. It has a lot of good features, like saving cached DNS data between reboots. You can find this software here: http://ntcanuck.com/ After installing it, I notice that web sites on my server which were taking about 2 extra seconds longer to load than they used to take started flashing across the screen instantaneously. I know that my conclusions about this are not scientific, but its hard to argue with results. Rob McEwen

2 1

Syntax error on line 1 near eval:
by David Groce 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

I am cross posting, but I need to find an answer quick. I finally removed my rpm installation of Spamassassin and installed via CPAN, which allowed me to install the SpamCopURI plugin as well. When I run spamassssin --lint, I get an error on the SpamCopURI.cf Specifically: Failed to compile URI SpamAssassin tests, skipping: (syntax error at /etc/mail/spamassassin/spamcop_uri.cf, rule SPAMCOP_URI_RBL, line 1, near "eval:" Any ideas why this might be? I've also had problems with SpamAssassin itself since installed via CPAN, where I see these errors: Scalar found where operator expected at (eval 17) line 686, near "} $self" (Missing operator before $self?) Failed to run header SpamAssassin tests, skipping some: syntax error at (eval 17) line 686, near "} $self" Any guesses there? Perhaps related to the SpamCopURI plugin? David Groce CCNA Network Server Analyst/Coordinator North Kitsap School District

2 5

RE: Syntax error on line 1 near eval:
by Randal, Phil 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

Martin wrote: > David Groce wrote: > >> I am cross posting, but I need to find an answer quick. I finally >> removed my rpm installation of Spamassassin and installed via CPAN, >> which allowed me to install the SpamCopURI plugin as well. When I run >> spamassssin --lint, I get an error on the SpamCopURI.cf Specifically: >> >> Failed to compile URI SpamAssassin tests, skipping: >> (syntax error at > /etc/mail/spamassassin/spamcop_uri.cf, rule >> SPAMCOP_URI_RBL, line 1, near "eval:" > > I had the same problem when i installed SpamCopUri for the first time. > Check for linewraps in spamcop_uri.cf. That solved my problem. > > / Martin When I patched our spamassassin 2.63 (on Fedora Core 1) to include SpamCopURI it worked, but spamassassin --lint was failing. In the end I tracked it down to spamassassin stuff being in the vendor_perl directory relating to an older release of perl. Copying the appropriate .pm files from SpamCopUri to the appropriate Mail/Spamassassin directory in the /usr/lib/perl5 tree solved that problem. So I'd have a dig in /usr/lib/perl5 looking for Mail/Spamassassin and making sure the SpamCopURI modules are in there. Phil ---- Phil Randal Network Engineer Herefordshire Council Hereford, UK

1 0

RE: SPAM: Phishing attempt?
by Chris Santerre 27 Jul '04

27 Jul '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: kriston(a)MOUSE-WORKS.COM [mailto:kriston@MOUSE-WORKS.COM] >Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 3:29 AM >To: SPAM-L(a)PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM >Subject: Re: SPAM: Phishing attempt? > > >On 26 Jul 2004 at 1:07, David Smith <dbsmith(a)ATBBS.DYNDNS.ORG> wrote: > >> 01o.com belongs to Britemoon, Inc. A quick websearch brings up >> mentions of Britemoon as a spammer, which is why I'm wondering >> if Qwest might not have hired them for this. Is it common for a >> known spammer to go into the phishing business? > >According to here, http://www.britemoon.com/about/index3.html, >Qwest is >one of their clients. Britemoon probably does their email >marketing. I >came across the same thing with Consumer Reports when I confirmed that >they were using a DoubleClick subsidiary to do their "email >marketing", >aka spamming. > NANAS has lots of hits for this guy. Joe Lucas. He send UBE/UCE on behalf of large businesses like Days Inn, Fedex, Qwest, ect....... But it is spam, as they buy lists to send to and there is no opt-in. Not even close to double opt-in :) --Chris

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss