Karl Pearson schrieb:
> So, what about doing a whois query and 'grep' for the setup date? You
Good luck with parsing the myriad of output formats from the different
whois services. And good luck going after those that do not publish a
setup date (like eg the .de ccTLD).
-- Matthias
Marc Perkel schrieb:
> And I don't yet know if it will work. I'm still building the list. I
> just wanted to throw the concept out there and see if it sparks
> innovation. It might turn out to be a dead end.
I don't think if this is really innovative (my own recollection goes
back to an experim
Marc Perkel wrote:
Blaine Fleming wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered
domain names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse,
all the ccTL
> I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
> those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
> domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often
> don't have data from all the registries. So - here's a different
> solution.
>
> What I
Ken A wrote:
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>
>>
>> Ken A wrote:
>>> Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect
new domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data and they
oft
Marc Perkel wrote:
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often
don't have data from all the registri
This will actually work. I've been involved in a university experiment doing
this for over a year now. Simply put, trying to create a list of new spammer
domains is a "count to infinity" problem. Creating a list of old domains is
not.
Jeff Moss
From: Mar
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Karl Pearson wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:44 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:44 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For those
of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new doma
: Mon 22-Sep-08 20:45
To: Blaine Fleming
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Trying out a new concept
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:26 -0600, Blaine Fleming wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
> >
> >> This is why I started processing all the TLDs I was able to obtain
> >&
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:26 -0600, Blaine Fleming wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
> >
> >> This is why I started processing all the TLDs I was able to obtain
> >> access to. There is lag but the most it could be is about 24 hours
> >> and that assumes they register a new domain immediately after the
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:13 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Where I'm getting hits is on spam bots that link to these new domains.
> Spambots are easy to detect because they never use the QUIT command to
> clost the connection. So if a spambot message links to an "unfamliar"
> domain (a domain NOT
John Hardin wrote:
This is why I started processing all the TLDs I was able to obtain
access to. There is lag but the most it could be is about 24 hours
and that assumes they register a new domain immediately after the TLD
dumps the zone.
Does your data allow mapping domain name to registr
Blaine Fleming wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered
domain names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse,
all the ccTLDs pretty much refuse to
SM wrote:
Even if your traffic patterns are different, the hit rates shouldn't
be that low. There would be a difference if your MTA uses a DNSBL to
reject or if you apply other pre-content filtering techniques.
It's not a matter of different traffic patterns as much as a matter of
when I d
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Blaine Fleming wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered domain
names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse, all
the cc
Blaine Fleming wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered
domain names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse,
all the ccTLDs pretty much refus
Hi Blaine,
At 17:00 22-09-2008, Blaine Fleming wrote:
Honestly, on my system I have less than 0.01% hits against a list of
domains registered in the last five days so I've always considered
the list a failure. However, several others are reporting excellent
hit rates on it. I think it is beca
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered
domain names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse, all
the ccTLDs pretty much refuse to even talk to you abo
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Curtis LaMasters wrote:
Daniel, I think your missing the point, or I'm completely lost but I
believe the point of the list is to tag domains with a registration date
of a week or less when sending mail to you (prevent spam from newly
registered domains).
Marc didn't say
McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:44 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
domains, as you know there's a la
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:17 -0500, Curtis LaMasters wrote:
> Daniel, I think your missing the point, or I'm completely lost but I
> believe the point of the list is to tag domains with a registration
> date of a week or less when sending mail to you (prevent spam from
> newly registered domains).
Daniel, I think your missing the point, or I'm completely lost but I
believe the point of the list is to tag domains with a registration date of
a week or less when sending mail to you (prevent spam from newly registered
domains). I may be off but that's the way I understand DOB.
Curtis LaMaster
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:44 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> Ken A wrote:
> > Marc Perkel wrote:
> >> I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
> >> those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
> >> domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often
don't have data from all the registries. So - here's a di
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For those
of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new domains,
as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often don't have
data from all the registries. So - here's a different solution
26 matches
Mail list logo
