-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 661
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
domain reputation DB #696
Comments
It would - except I can't see that the data is publicly available? |
Scroll down to the bottom of that page and click the Developers link to find the API info page. |
Forgot to mention that I looked at this when after you posted the above. Personally - I think the T&Cs are a bit of a showstopper:
I manually sampled some data and I don't really think the work involved for this would be worth it e.g. it didn't find anything for the URIs that I tried. |
Maybe WoT isn't quite the right tool. In much of the current spam, the domains are disposable, populated with "all the right DNS" (SPF, FCrDNS, helo hostname, etc), and then some amount of time elapses (so the domains fall off the "newly observed domains" lists (nod, sem-fresh, etc.), and then the campaigns begin. Another way to detect these disposable domains is to perform a Google search. In nearly every case, these disposable domains have zero matches. I can't think of many real-world cases where anyone would want to receive email from a domain with no Google visibility. Thoughts? |
PhishTank is focused exclusively on phishing but it has a downloading database, making it a viable source of data to check URLs against. |
Another one is Spam404. I don't see a data URL, but it appears it'd be pretty easy to scrape the web pages and maintain a local copy of the domain list. |
Artists against 419 provides their DB via SOAP, so it could be sucked into a local DB and queried against as well. |
PhishTank data is included in SURBL IIRC. |
And ClamAV UNOFFICIAL. |
for future reference: https://github.com/jpf/domain-profiler |
This ticket seems redundant. I'm going to close - re-open if you think it's important. |
Along with URIBL, WoT would make another excellent check against incoming email.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: