Hi,

Over the past few days I have been investigating more closely email
that wasn't tagged that I thought should have been, and vice-versa,
using various factors, such as URIBL_BLACK and JMF_W. I'm very
surprised that obvious hosts are on the URIBL_BLACK list, like
receiveeweek.com.

Even more interesting is a bunch of FNs that contain both URIBL_BLACK
and JMF_W. I'm not sure which is correct in many cases, because they
are not always so cut-and-dried. For example, there was a Citi Bank
email (whitelisted) that happened to use an image server
(csnimages.com) that is in URIBL_BLACK.

While I don't think that particular email should have been tagged as
spam, it's only an example, and I hoped someone would be interested
enough to check out a list I created with these types of disparities
I've had over the last day or so.

It's too long to include here, so I've created a pastebin for it:

http://pastebin.com/m4a1561b5

I realize this type of thing could happen for many reasons, not the
least of which is an otherwise-legitimate host that has been
compromised and now used to send spam. However, many on my list are
quite persistent, like blr-events.com and eturbonews.com, which I have
no idea whether it is legitimate or bogus.

Whatever the case, there are definitely mistakes, and I'd like to help
correct them.

Ideas appreciated. I'd be glad to gather more info if necessary.

Thanks
Alex

Reply via email to