spammer domains 29 Apr 07
04-30-2007, 03:06 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
04-30-2007, 03:06 AM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
04-30-2007, 03:06 AM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
<earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
04-30-2007, 07:08 AM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
The Merg wrote:
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:08 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
The Merg wrote:
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:08 AM
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
The Merg wrote:
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:08 AM
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
The Merg wrote:
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
> Wrong group again, Doug :P
Yep.
It has something to do with what group I just
finished reading. The post is automated and
should only go to news.admin.net-abuse.email
but for some reason it follows the newsreader.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:11 AM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
SnoMan wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:11 AM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
SnoMan wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
04-30-2007, 07:11 AM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Re: spammer domains 29 Apr 07
SnoMan wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:47:52 -0600, "Earle Horton"
> <earle@vascongado.usa> wrote:
>
>> Not that it isn't interesting as all get-out...
>
>
> This is but a very small fraction of the spammer domains out there and
> none of the nasty ones either as I have seen anyway.
Yea. It's only based on a few spammy DNS servers. The full list,
for those that want to look at such things, can be found here.
http://revbeergoggles.com/spammers/bloss/bloss.txt
That post is a daily sweep of new sites.
--
DougW
