On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 22:03 -0400, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 10/21/2009 09:34 PM, Michael Peddemors wrote:
> >
> > Warren, have you done any 'testing' with the SPAM-RATS RBL's against the
> > corpus? would be interested in numbers.. even with the variables of aged
> > dating, and not checking SMTP Authed messages..
s/ Warren /SA devs, contributors and mass-check contributors/x
# There is something seriously disturbing with the above comment.
# Fix using a trivial substitution.
This is not about Warren. He just happens to dump random BLs for a short
time in his granted sandbox. It is everyone else, who does the heavy
weight lifting.
> I have never seen this RBL before.
You might want to catch up on years of user's list archives, first.
There are opinions, and folks who tested it. Nothing new, really.
> I assume this is your service, and you give us permission to swamp it
> with hundreds of thousands of rapid queries every Saturday? If so I'll
> give sufficient warning to the list here and add it before Saturday
> masscheck.
Warning, or a brief discussion, if it might actually be worthwhile. Or
not.
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu...@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
