Mike Cardwell wrote: > Graeme Fowler wrote: >> On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 16:37 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote: >>> One of the important additions I made in the code was the addition of >>> checking against a whitelist database to eliminate false positives. >> Small nit: that doesn't eliminate false positives. It eliminates >> returning positive results against hosts, addresses or URIs in the >> database - not the same thing at all. > > *Every* single domain name that it caught on my system yesterday failed > to fall within their listing policy: > > existsshaded.com > dozencourier.com > orecopper.com > bedcalab.com > anrosite.com > searchvisiontech.com > cluttlergroup.com > dogsswim.com > phosphatefarmhouse.com > jadedistinguished.com > > None of those are were created within the last 5 days. Most of them were > nowhere near 5 days.
However, every single one of them either has fake whois data, is a questionable marking email source, has had its dns servers re-delegated due to spam, or is a click farming operation. If they keep on listing the domains that no one wants to hear from past 5 days, I don't mind ;) -- The Exim Manual http://www.exim.org/docs.html http://docs.exim.org/current/ -- ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
