@CanO'Spam Yes, if the question explicitly mentions a product, the answer is not required to disclose affiliation. (Assuming, of course, the question was posted organically). We still prefer there to be disclosure, but it's not mandatory in these cases.
@cigien That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in body and Potentially bad keyword in answer Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
@Nick Core gives access to some more tools. I, personally, use the SQL queries (rarely), and add domains (also not very frequently). I'm not sure if there's anything else I do that relies on Core privileges.
@Nick That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
I feel like a watch like 4MW2TO3UTYLCJ1(?#wa\.me) to catch https://wa.me/message/4MW2TO3UTYLCJ1 (from this post) feels appropriate also, but don't know
@SmokeDetector I know this website is blacklisted and all and has a ton of TPs, but I'm inclined to believe this post in particular is FP. They have a handful of answers and this is the first one including this website. Also on Google, if you search "burp suite vs zap", the software secured website is the first result, and searching "burpsuite alternatives" brings up the blacklisted website as the third result.
@Jesse Oops, I copied from the previous message that had a typo. Thanks. And no, I don't see any reason to make the s optional, because the report only had the pattern with an s in it.
@cigien That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
@CanO'Spam Not sure. But some of these kinds of codes are case-sensitive. For example https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leIK1aUOF-Q is different from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leIk1aUOF-Q (lowercase "k")
@cigien An invalid pattern was provided, please check your command.
@cigien A normalized version, {{'919149455539'}}, of that pattern is already on the number watchlist. You can use !!/bisect-number +919149455539 to determine which entries on the number lists match that pattern, which would tell you: Matched by 919149455539 on line 3717 of watched_numbers.txt: 919149455539 found normalized
@CanO'Spam A normalized version, {{'27732048614'}}, of that pattern is already on the number watchlist. You can use !!/bisect-number +27732048614 to determine which entries on the number lists match that pattern, which would tell you: Matched by (+277) 320-48614 on line 3696 of watched_numbers.txt: 27732048614 found normalized
@ThomasWard Received referral response - DNS servers for metasmoke.erwaysoftware.com": -> dns.thomas-ward-consulting.llc (no IP address) ## from simpledns.plus/lookup-dg
The registrar for my LLC's domain has unfortunately been too slow and the domain has not renewed in a timely manner. As such, MS is down from a DNS perspective for outside access as a result of this. I am on the phone with my registrar right now to see what the heck happened.
> Pattern-matching website in body, pattern-matching website in title, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad ns for domain in title ---------- Pattern-matching website in body - Position 7-25: bestellenonline.co Pattern-matching website in title - Position 7-25: bestellenonline.co Potentially bad ns for domain in body - kamagrabestellenonline.com NS suspicious ns2.siteground.net.,ns1.siteground.net. Potentially bad ns for domain in title - kamagrabestellenonline.com NS suspicious ns2.siteground.net.,ns1.siteground.net.
@Makyen, while I may not have been here too long, I believe I have experience in moderation (as of right now, I have 189 helpful flags and 7 waiting for review). I was wondering if I could get SD privileges and MS reviewer. I understand the MS website is down, so I understand if that causes any delays.
For round 2 (May -> Sept) of the blacklist cleanup, starting with 5378 blacklisted websites, only 147 had TP% under 95%; of those, only 35 need to be reviewed. Should only take RAND(RANGE(6,8)) $UNITS this time :)
(some of the 147 with less than 95% TP were kept blacklisted for various reasons; usually due to mixed feedback and judgement calls)
((ping me if you want any details; most would involve clearing conflicting feedback in some way))
