http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3549





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-05-26 23:23 -------
Subject: Re:  Inconsistent coverage of private registries in 
RegistrarBoundaries.pm

  > Can you clarify:
> 
> If spammer.domain.com is a bad guy and hammer.domain.com is a good guy,
> wouldn't *.domain.com catch both of them and therefore FP if hammer.domain.com
> appeared in a message body URI?

With only the  "*.domain.com IN A 127.0.0.x"  record, of course.

You'd have to add a  "hammer.domain.com IN TXT clean"  for each clean 
host.  This would cause nothing to be listed in the answer section, but 
you wouldn't get an NXDOMAIN, you'd get a NOERROR.


Of course this (being able to whitelist some and blacklist other 
hostnames under a domain) is independent of the registrar boundary 
issue... which may not really be that big of an issue, I don't know.


> FWIW We *did* consider these kinds of issues when we (collectively) worked on 
> the designs.

I'd imagined it had been discussed.  I'd just wondered why it wasn't 
adopted.  If I had to guess it'd be the extra lookups due to the lack of 
caching of random or "tracking" hostnames.





------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to