fireballrus@gmail.com wrote:

Really? {It is not that I doubt you (ok, yea I doubt it).}
The script from jmarshall.com/tools/cgiproxy ?
or a script from somewhere else? (where?)
.. or through a form at a web site? (where?)

--
E-Mail Sent to this address Griffin-Technologies.net>
will be added to the BlackLists.

In <1167960290.736794.259370@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>, on
01/05/2007
at 01:39 AM, "btaylor" basi.com> said:

Please include the list, record number and IP address in your subject.

By whom? What was in the rejection message? If there was a URL, did
you read the web page?

I see from http://www.completewhois.com/rbl_lookup.htm that you are
listed in none of the lists that they monitor. However, I see two good
reasosn that someone would reject your traffic.

FCrDNS fails; the rDNS for 216.57.139.34 is
mail2.odysseys-unlimited.com, but there is no A record for that
domain.

The whois data at ARIN show an rwhois server of rwhois.veroxity.net
for 216.57.139.34, but that domain does not exist.

Hi Josh,

Thanks for the time to respond to my inquiry. The block by:

(http://www.uceprotect.net/en/)

Was the one I was most curious about since as you mention Spamcop was a
bit more specific.

I looked at the data on trustedsource and it looks a little weird. I
guess on the 29th more mail was sent from our addresses than usual and
then on the second of Jan a dramatic increase. I will look into this
at the office and see if it is true through the logs and questioning
users.

As for the spam traps I believe it couldn't have happened from this IP
address. We literally only respond to people who have specifically
asked for informatoin about a tour or individual correspondence of some
sort. I am looking into this to make sure but I'm pretty confident
this couldn't have happened (unless they set up sting operations of
some sort pretending to be someone who is interested in something and
then blcok them when they respond - hightly unlikely I would think).

On Fri, 5 Jan 2007 11:04:08 GMT, E-Mail Sent to this address will be
added to the BlackLists
opined:

I believe that all of veroxity is static. I have a dhcp zone
exclusion on the /19.

btaylor wrote:

That does not look (to me) like the IP of a ISP authorized
mail server, that IP appears to have been emitting Spam.

216.57.139.34 -> host-216-57-139-34.customer.veroxity.net
IP has generic rDNS PTR w/ short (8 Hours) TTL, IP is not SWIPed
216.57.128.0/19 , Direct Allocation , veroxity.net

You might have to ask the blacklist maintainer (or read why
if they provide the reason on their web site).

http://www.moensted.dk/spam/?addr=216.57.139.34

http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?216.57.139.34
http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action=blcheck&ip=216.57.139.34
* System has sent mail to SpamCop spam traps in the past week
(spam traps are secret, no reports or evidence are provided by SpamCop)
* SpamCop users have reported system as a source of spam less than
10 times in the past week

On Fri, 05 Jan 2007 01:39:18 +0000, btaylor wrote:

Bill,

I don't know specifically which blocklist you're referring to here, but
quick research into that IP address shows that

1) TrustedSource classifies that address's e-mail output as "suspicious"
and has logged e-mail output is up over 1000%% in the last 24 hours. See
http://trustedsource.org/query.php?q=216.57.139.34

Johann Steigenberger wrote:

Curious, who was that (i.e. what domain)?

In this case, there's just one alias in-between, and the name server
sends the A record it refers to in the initial response: