On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Chr. v. Stuckrad wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, John D. Hardin wrote:
>
> > > m,https?://(?:[^\./]+\.)*goo+gle(?:pages)?\.(?:[a-z][a-z][a-z]?(?:\.[a-z][a-z])?)/+.*[?&](?:btni|adurl),i
>
> If I understand that pattern, both the '*' are 'unbounded'???
>
> This might 'break' yo
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 13:01 +0100, Chr. v. Stuckrad wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, John D. Hardin wrote:
>
> > > m,https?://(?:[^\./]+\.)*goo+gle(?:pages)?\.(?:[a-z][a-z][a-z]?(?:\.[a-z][a-z])?)/+.*[?&](?:btni|adurl),i
>
> If I understand that pattern, both the '*' are 'unbounded'???
>
> This mig
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008, John D. Hardin wrote:
> > m,https?://(?:[^\./]+\.)*goo+gle(?:pages)?\.(?:[a-z][a-z][a-z]?(?:\.[a-z][a-z])?)/+.*[?&](?:btni|adurl),i
If I understand that pattern, both the '*' are 'unbounded'???
This might 'break' your spamfilter, if spamassassin gobbles
up all memory during
Whoops! Just noticed I didn't send this to the list after all...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, John D. Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Loren Wilton wrote:
>
> > I guess btnl is no longer working. Now they are doing a redirect:
> >
> > http://google.co.uk///pagead/iclk?sa=l&ai=livermore&num=970&ad
Quoting Justin Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
the redirect detection should have no problem finding that...
And the redirected-to domain is on two SURBL blacklists, so it should
be hitting.
Jeff C.
Loren Wilton writes:
I guess btnl is no longer working. Now they are doing a redirect:
htt
the redirect detection should have no problem finding that...
Loren Wilton writes:
> I guess btnl is no longer working. Now they are doing a redirect:
>
> http://google.co.uk///pagead/iclk?sa=l&ai=livermore&num=970&adurl=http://-low-rate.tw?beast
>
>
> Loren
I guess btnl is no longer working. Now they are doing a redirect:
http://google.co.uk///pagead/iclk?sa=l&ai=livermore&num=970&adurl=http://christmas-low-rate.tw?beast
Loren