Discuss

discuss@lists.surbl.org

2 participants
1873 discussions

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Whitelist kit . net
by Chris Santerre 05 Oct '04

05 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Yves Junqueira [mailto:yves.junqueira@gmail.com] >Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 12:04 PM >To: Jeff Chan; SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Whitelist kit . net > > >On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:29:14 -0700, Jeff Chan <jeffc(a)surbl.org> wrote: >> The policy is: if it has legitimate uses, then don't list. >> >> Can you provide some examples of legitimate sites on kit.net >> (preferably in English)? >> >> Jeff C. > >Sorry, I couldn't find any in english. > >http://www.tmabc.kit.net - >http://www.1mais1.kit.net - They seem good people. They are a group >of volunteers that assist home less people. Doesn't seem to be a scam. > >I'd suggest whitelisting kit.net if, and only if, you are really >strict to the policy. They do host many trojans and scam sites there. > Why not treat them like the tld is 'kit.net' and list on subdomains? --Chris

3 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs
by Chris Santerre 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 9:31 AM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs > > >On Monday, October 4, 2004, 6:17:09 AM, Alex Broens wrote: >> Jeff Chan wrote: > >>> catb.org >>> debian.org >>> debianforum.de >>> ffii.org >>> gnu.org >>> harddisk-recovery.nl >>> heise.de >>> infodrom.org >>> kitenet.net >>> leidenuniv.nl >>> linuxtag.org >>> opensource.org >>> pacmanhattan.com >>> romp.com >>> servebeer.com >>> spi-inc.org >>> uu.nl >>> wallsplash.net >>> xtronics.com > >> the .de are very ugly FPs, especially heise ...... wow > >Actually to clarify, that's the full list that appeared >in hams that had some FPs, but the FPs were only the >first three: > >>> servebeer.com belongs to dynamic DNS provider No-IP.com >>> so obviously it's subject to some abuse, but it also >>> seems to have legitimate uses. >>> >>> pacmanhattan.com is apparently a university student >>> project to play Pacman on city steets with people. >>> >>> romp.com appears to be a National Lampoon movie site. > >In other words those other domains appeared in messages >that had the three FPs. The others are not FPs, but >probably should be whitelisted since they appeared in >things like legitimate Linux newsletters. > >Hope this clarifies things. > serverbeer has 8 reported spams in a 9 month period. What was this link pointing to in the newsletter? --Chris

3 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs
by Chris Santerre 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Alex Broens [mailto:surbl@alexb.ch] >Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 11:02 AM >To: SURBL Discussion list >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs > > >Chris Santerre wrote: >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >>>Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 10:34 AM >>>To: SURBL Discuss >>>Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs >>> >>> >>>On Monday, October 4, 2004, 7:24:08 AM, Chris Santerre wrote: >>> >>>>>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >>> >>>>>>>servebeer.com belongs to dynamic DNS provider No-IP.com >>>>>>>so obviously it's subject to some abuse, but it also >>>>>>>seems to have legitimate uses. >>> >>>>serverbeer has 8 reported spams in a 9 month period. >>> >>>>What was this link pointing to in the newsletter? >>> >>>It was in a Debian bug report: >>> >>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-wnpp/2004/06/msg00434.html >>> >>> >>>>From: Florian Ragwitz <florian(a)mookooh.org> >>>>To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit(a)bugs.debian.org> >>>>Subject: ITP: wmibam -- dockapp to monitor the apm status using ibam >>>>X-Mailer: reportbug 2.58 >>>>Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 18:26:36 +0200 >>>>X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel(a)lists.debian.org >>>>Message-Id: <20040525162643.17303184E2(a)godsmacker.servebeer.com> >>>>Delivered-To: submit(a)bugs.debian.org >>>>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin >2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 >>>> (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org >>>>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 >>> >>>tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, >>> >>>> X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham >>> >>>version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 >>> >>>>X-Spam-Level: >>>> >>>>Package: wnpp >>>>Severity: wishlist >>>> >>>>* Package name : wmibam >>>> Version : 0.0.1 >>>> Upstream Author : Florian Ragwitz <florian(a)mookooh.org> >>>>* URL : >> >> http://godsmacker.servebeer-MUNGED.com/~florian/wmibam/ >> >>>* License : GPL >>> Description : dockapp to monitor the apm status using ibam >>> >>> wmibam is a dockapp that monitors the apm status using the >intellegent >>> battery monitor (ibam) by Sebastian Ritterbusch. It can be used with >>> window managers like WindowMaker, AfterStep, BlackBox or >>> Enlightenment. >> >> >> >> The link is dead. Perhaps they boot ham'rs from their network? ;) >> > >go the feeling the guy miss-spelt. Probably meant >servebeer.com which is >a dyndns domain offered by no-ip.com. > Yes....which will not let you connect. -Chris

1 0

Whitelist kit . net
by Yves Junqueira 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

Hi. kit.net is a free host provider in Brazil that hosts many phishing scams with trojans etc as sub domains. Yet, they host a few inocent sites too. According to the "if it's in ham, do not list it" policy, this one should not be listed. I had to add "kit.net" (not ".kit.net") to my local whitelist because WC was giving me many FPs. I maintain a small list of *.kit.net spam domains that could be used. What is the policy for this kind of free host servers? In my local rbl server I have all those Spamvertized domains listed, but "kit.net" itself is not. -- Yves Junqueira http://www.lynx.com.br

2 2

RE: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs
by Chris Santerre 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

>-----Original Message----- >From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] >Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 10:34 AM >To: SURBL Discuss >Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Help checking a few FPs > > >On Monday, October 4, 2004, 7:24:08 AM, Chris Santerre wrote: >>>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc@surbl.org] > >>>>> servebeer.com belongs to dynamic DNS provider No-IP.com >>>>> so obviously it's subject to some abuse, but it also >>>>> seems to have legitimate uses. > >> serverbeer has 8 reported spams in a 9 month period. > >> What was this link pointing to in the newsletter? > >It was in a Debian bug report: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-wnpp/2004/06/msg00434.html > >> From: Florian Ragwitz <florian(a)mookooh.org> >> To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit(a)bugs.debian.org> >> Subject: ITP: wmibam -- dockapp to monitor the apm status using ibam >> X-Mailer: reportbug 2.58 >> Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 18:26:36 +0200 >> X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel(a)lists.debian.org >> Message-Id: <20040525162643.17303184E2(a)godsmacker.servebeer.com> >> Delivered-To: submit(a)bugs.debian.org >> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 >> (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org >> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.0 required=4.0 >tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE, >> X_DEBBUGS_CC autolearn=ham >version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2004_03_25 >> X-Spam-Level: >> >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> >> * Package name : wmibam >> Version : 0.0.1 >> Upstream Author : Florian Ragwitz <florian(a)mookooh.org> >> * URL : http://godsmacker.servebeer-MUNGED.com/~florian/wmibam/ > * License : GPL > Description : dockapp to monitor the apm status using ibam > > wmibam is a dockapp that monitors the apm status using the intellegent > battery monitor (ibam) by Sebastian Ritterbusch. It can be used with > window managers like WindowMaker, AfterStep, BlackBox or > Enlightenment. The link is dead. Perhaps they boot ham'rs from their network? ;) --Chris

2 1

namesdatabase . com
by Bitz 04 Oct '04

04 Oct '04

namesdatabase . com Listed at WS. It has legit uses, should be whitelisted?

10 17

Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: 419 for school???
by Frank Ellermann 03 Oct '04

03 Oct '04

David B Funk wrote: [esthereki17(a)indiatimes.com} > This scammer is probably depending upon their victims to > just hit the "Reply" button. indiatimes.com.abuse.rfc-ignorant.org = 127.0.0.4 That's a known bulletproof 419 RfC ignorant. :-( Bye, Frank

1 0

Possible FP @ WS
by Bitz 03 Oct '04

03 Oct '04

phonehog . com 0 in SBL. Few sightings in NANAS, possibly due to their referral program. Domain was created on: 15-Dec-99 and does offer free long distance calls to their subscribers (i don't know what is the catch). The site looks legit and should be whitelisted, I think ;-) Jeff, I'm sending you a copy of the message off-list. Regards, -b.

2 1

FP?
by Bitz 03 Oct '04

03 Oct '04

Hello, The following domains are listed at WS, there were sightings in NANAS, some says poetry . com is a total scam :-) cellular-parts . com Created on: 30-Jul-98 poetry . com Created on 15-Oct-1996 We have customers who are actively subscribed to their lists. But just wanted to get everyones opinion whether these 2 should be whitelisted. Thanks, -b.

3 5

FP on WS
by Bill Landry 03 Oct '04

03 Oct '04

Listed on WS: e-cost.com Record created on 16-Jun-1998 NANAS hits: None after Aug-03 SBL listing: No listing Looks like they have a legitimate subscription/unsubscription process. Bill

3 2

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