SPF for forgery prevention (was Re: [linux-elitists] http get vs post...)
Karsten M. Self
Sat Oct 25 21:44:59 PDT 2003
on Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 09:28:58PM -0700, Josh Neal (email@example.com) wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2003 at 02:11:15AM +0000, Karsten M. Self wrote:
> > http://www.senderbase.org/search?searchString=184.108.40.206
> > What I *don't* get, however, is what I specifically mentioned: the
> > spamminess/hamminess of the IP. There _is_ useful information which can
> > help confirm suspicions (e.g.: the sudden burst in traffic on this IP),
> > but I don't see the specific information which would be most helpful.
> Actually, you _do_ get this information, it's just not particularly
> obvious. Thethe SenderBase Reputation Score indicates where the IP
> falls on the spam/ham line. For your example, 220.127.116.11, the score
> is -1.4, indicating a possible spammer.
I don't see this on the URL above. Searching "reputation" and "score"
on page don't reveal it. Or am I missing something?
> In the near future, the reputation score will be available through a
> DNSBL-style query. Documentation explaining how the score is derived
> should be available then as well.
Karsten M. Self <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://kmself.home.netcom.com/
What Part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?
If spam is the question, Spamassassin is the answer.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://allium.zgp.org/pipermail/linux-elitists/attachments/20031026/c06c52db/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-elitists