.
As for what tools are available to do this now, I don't know of any. Sorry.
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Dear Spamdyke community,
Is it possible to use Spamdyke to quarantine e-mail, e.g., identify all
mail
from a certain sender (or other criteria) and send it to a special mailbox
rather than
, remove or change recipients as a
message arrives.
As for what tools are available to do this now, I don't know of any. Sorry.
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Dear Spamdyke community,
Is it possible to use Spamdyke to quarantine e-mail, e.g., identify
all mail from a certain sender (or other
I'm not a big fan of UCEProtect right now, as their list blocks our outgoing
mail because our ISP is associated with large amounts of spam. This
methodology, while no doubt effective at blocking spam, must generate a lot
of false positives because of this guilt by association philosophy. Our
ISP
analysis
yes, but i use their level 1 protection. level 2 3 are indeed
aggressive. but i am also of the opinion that isps are partly responsible
for their clients using their bandwidth to spam and they should
blacklist these customers and take legal action against them.
Shantanu
--
* Joe Canner jcan
.
Joe Canner wrote:
Yes, Level 1 protection seems reasonable. We passed level 1 but failed
level 2 and 3 because of other clients using our ISP. I've only had one
recipient so far block us because of this, but I fear this might be just
the
beginning.
I agree that ISPs should take some
server
in-house, and/or use an affordable outbound mail service such as
DynDNS's Mailhop Outbound. If you don't have a static IP address
in-house, DynDNS's CustomDNS service solves that problem affordably.
Disclaimer: I'm not associated with DynDNS, but I do use and recommend
their services.
Joe
-users-boun...@spamdyke.org] On Behalf Of Sam Clippinger
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 20:40
To: spamdyke users
Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] Spammers spoofing internal FROM addresses
This is exactly what I had in mind. Has it made a difference?
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Sam et al
for all of your local domains?
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Dear Spamdyke community,
A month or two ago there was a thread about spam where the FROM
address is the same as the TO address (both referring to the recipient
of the spam). At the time, this issue was dismissed without
either completely wrong or I'm losing my
mind, please let me know which one so I can plan accordingly. :)
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Sam,
Thanks for your response. I'm trying SPF at the moment to see if that
will
work.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean about requiring
[mailto:spamdyke-users-boun...@spamdyke.org] On Behalf Of Joe Canner
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 11:48 AM
To: 'spamdyke users'
Subject: Re: [spamdyke-users] Spammers spoofing internal FROM addresses
Sam,
Having given up on SPF, I am about to try a couple of things related to what
you are suggesting:
1
completely wrong or I'm losing my
mind, please let me know which one so I can plan accordingly. :)
-- Sam Clippinger
Joe Canner wrote:
Sam,
Thanks for your response. I'm trying SPF at the moment to see if that
will
work.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean about requiring authentication
.
Thank you all for your assistance.
Best Regards,
Joe Canner
Casablanca, MOROCCO
___
spamdyke-users mailing list
spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org
http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
12 matches
Mail list logo
