On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Justin Mason<j...@jmason.org> wrote: > I've heard that they are diligent about terminating abusive clients. > Are you reporting these spams to them? > > --j. >
>From what I've seen, most of the traffic from them probably doesn't qualify as spam by the common definition. It is, however, stuff that nobody here wants. I'm surprised SA is giving them a pass, but there have been other strange things that got a free ride through SA in the past, like Habeas certified junk. > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 09:55, Mike > Cardwell<spamassassin-us...@lists.grepular.com> wrote: >> rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: >> >>> I'm probably missing something here - but Constant Contact (who we block >>> by IP) have been a nagging source of spam for us. I'm just wondering why >>> 25_uribl.cf has this line in it: >>> >>> ## DOMAINS TO SKIP (KNOWN GOOD) >>> >>> # Don't bother looking for example domains as per RFC 2606. >>> uridnsbl_skip_domain example.com example.net example.org >>> >>> ...... >>> uridnsbl_skip_domain constantcontact.com corporate-ir.net cox.net cs.com >>> >>> Is this a uri that is really suitable for white listing ? >> >> A set of perl modules has been uploaded to cpan today for talking to the >> ConstantContact API: >> >> http://search.cpan.org/~arich/Email-ConstantContact-0.02/lib/Email/ConstantContact.pm >> >> I just thought it was a weird coincidence, seeing as I'd never heared of >> them before today. >> >> -- >> Mike Cardwell - IT Consultant and LAMP developer >> Cardwell IT Ltd. (UK Reg'd Company #06920226) http://cardwellit.com/ >> >> >
