[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: bug reports with urls in them


Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

> Michael Welle <mwe012008@gmx.net> writes:
>> I just tried to report a bug. To show how one can reproduce
>> the bug I needed an url, I chose www.foo.org for that purpose. The
>> result:
>> <submit@bugs.debian.org>:
>> failed after I sent the message.
>> Remote host said: 550-Blacklisted URL in message. (foo.org) in [black]. See
>> 550 http://lookup.uribl.com.
>> WTF? Interesting user experience, bug reporters will like that big
>> time...
> The problem here is that foo.org is a real domain, and one that appears to
> be owned by one of those domain parking companies that quite likely could
> be doing lots of grey things with the domain.  A lot of those companies
> are at the least spammers.
> In this particular case, it's in a blacklist with a zero-false-positive
> goal, which *probably* (although with blacklists it's always suspect)
> means that there really was a spamvertised site or other direct spam usage
> of that URL, although it's possible that the reports were from "generic"
> URL usages similar to yours mixed in with spam.
> There are various registered domains specifically for use for your purpose
> (example.com, example.org, example.net, and others).  It's generally best
> to use them for any generic example rather than a domain that could be
> real.
I personally don't like services that blacklist hostnames for reasons
that I can't control. IIRC even machines controlled by the big Linux
projects appeared on such blacklists in the past. If you design your
infrastructure around such services your design is f* up, IMO.

Anyways, what if I want to report a bug that happens if I use foo.org?


biff4emacsen - A biff-like tool for (X)Emacs
Flood - Your friendly network packet generator

Reply to: