Re: What is up with Charter?

TRANS OCEAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT is the owner of yamibuy and I'm pretty sure if you were to pick up the phone and call yamibuy's main office 1-800 407 9710 and get transferred to their IT group you would be able to get someone who cared enough to investigate. Ted

Re: IPv6 issue

I used to greylist and it helped a lot. 2FA killed that, however. When someone logs into a website, bank, etc quite often they use an email address as the second factor - so for that to work the email has to be delivered instantaneously. Also most 2FA does not follow any kind of SMTP

Re: IPv6 issue

would stick out like a sore thumb and be easy for the majors to block. I think I will run the mailserver like this for a few weeks and see what happens and if there are any user complaints. Ted On 5/6/2022 4:40 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt writes: For unrelated reasons I had

IPv6 issue

Hi All, I hope this does not start a holy war. For unrelated reasons I had to turn off IPv6 on my incoming mailserver. Spam plummeted. Like by 80% at least. Both uncaught and caught spam did. When IPv6 was on, the mailserver had all PTR and and MX records to allow it to receive

Re: Bad entries in HOSTKARMA_W

My guess is if you contact the admin of hostkarma directly and offer to host a honeypot he might take you up on it. But that still won't give you the ability to change anything in the database. I cannot imagine trusting a RBL that allowed any humans to blacklist something. Whitelisting is

Re: OT: is sorbs.net sleeping ?

On 4/9/2021 8:26 AM, Dominic Raferd wrote: That sounds reasonable. But my experience is that spamhaus RBLs (zen, zrd, dbl) have a zero false positive rate (or so low that I have never found one). IMHO if an email is matched by spamhaus it is the sender's big problem, not the recipient's.

Re: Why the new changes need to be "depricated" forever

Arrg do we have to invoke the "Toilet Rule"* ? Would everyone calm down if Kevin would promise to never make another change to bow to the gods of Political Correctness? Kevin, would you be humble enough to make this promise and admit you stepped in a pile of caw-caw? I'm sure the real spammers

Re: BIMI pilot at Google

pose is to make things safer" Ted On 7/23/2020 2:31 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Search for "you" in your response to me. -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171 On Th

Re: More Responses about Various Questions revolving around WelcomeLIst/BlockList changes

On 7/23/2020 10:12 AM, Ralph Seichter wrote: explained repeatedly. Some people thinking the connection to racism exists do not turn this alleged connection into a fact. But don't you understand Ralph that those people are the Very Most Importantist People In The Entire World so what they

Re: Why the new changes need to be "depricated" forever

Was it really that unclear that I was speaking tongue-in-cheek? Man o Man I missed my calling in life. I should have gone into scamming people if I was able to get you guys to think that load of BS about forking was serious Ted On 7/23/2020 7:06 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Note: If you

Re: BIMI pilot at Google

On 7/22/2020 11:14 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: I posted it without any opinion just as a data point. No need for the personal attack. What personal attack? It's a standard and google is an org. Neither are people. Ted

Re: BIMI pilot at Google

Well Kevin I think that article is one of the biggest lying sacks of dog dung I have ever read. The ONLY reason they are doing this is pure greed. The email scanning services charge extra for applying "branding" and the amounts are unreal, and I happen to have a customer going through the

Re: Why the new changes need to be "depricated" forever

Has it occurred to ANYONE arguing over this that the source code of SpamAssassin is Open Source so if you do not like the politically correct change that was made to appease the Snowflakes, that it is not that difficult to write a patch that will switch the distribution back to the old wording?

Re: IMPORTANT NOTICE: Rules referencing WHITELIST or BLACKLIST in process of being Renamed

You go shut your piehole Woke white guys who know best about racism against blacks and who use a domain name that insults native Americans have spoken!!! Black people and people of color need to go sit down and shut up while woke white guys who know best for them do what is best for

Re: IMPORTANT NOTICE FOR PEOPLE RUNNING TRUNK re: [Bug 7826] Improve language around whitelist/blacklist and master/slave

I think this bit is finally dying down so I will merely point out as the last, final nail in the coffin on all of this, that the majority of people on both the Apache and the Linux projects (as well as the other larger commercial entities like Google, etc. that are engaged in this) are NOT

Re: Linux, Twitter, Mysql, Github, etc, all plan to remove blacklist and whitelist, master and slave.

I don't see a problem since blacklist/whitelist are terms the computer industry just grabbed from hotel reservation desks or some place like that. It's not going to stop their use by the general public of course. As for master/slave those were picked up by mechanical designers and borrowed

Re: Question on early detection for relay spam

On 3/3/2020 5:53 AM, Riccardo Alfieri wrote: On 03/03/20 08:54, Benny Pedersen wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt skrev den 2020-03-03 08:26: What do other people do for this problem? Hi Ted, What I can suggest you is to look at our DQS product (https://www.spamhaustech.com/dqs/), that even

RE: Question on early detection for relay spam

Well for example of the trouble RBLS cause see this one for your own number: -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [212.26.193.44 listed in list.dnswl.org] >and then immediately forget it,

Question on early detection for relay spam

I know this is probably off topic but I'm getting desperate enough to ask. I run a commercial mailserver that regularly seems to have spammers relay mail through it that have obtained stolen credentials for a user. Many years ago I stopped allowing users to change passwords on it and I setup

New idea for stopping spam

Hi All, OK I've been doing some sociological analysis of the spam I've been getting on my honeypot, Bays feeder email boxes (dangerous, I know) and I've come up with what I think MIGHT be a way to fight spam that I wanted to run up the flagpole. We all know ONE basic thing about spam:

Re: OT - Possibly some good news

Hi Marc, There are drugs that will stimulate the production of white blood cells at a tremendous rate, I was on one of these back in '94 when I was dealing with my cancer. It's well known in oncology that everyone always has a few cancer cells bouncing around in their bodies all the time, but

Re: Matching infinite sets

On 8/22/2016 11:40 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 09:03:38 -0700 Marc Perkel wrote: The ones that are the same are of no interest. Only where it matches one side and not the other. On 08/22/16 09:06, Dianne Skoll wrote: But... but...

Re: I have some bad news

On 8/19/2016 3:34 AM, Ram wrote: Marc thats too bad. But stage 4 lung cancer does not mean you have to die of it. And chill about spam. I know you have been great at contributions to anti-spam ( and we all remember your distinct hate of SPF :-) ). But antispam is just "commodity" technology.

Re: I have some bad news

n they get it, just delete it - which while it puts it in a deleted folder that I can get at (if they are IMAP) it mixes it up with deleted ham, so I cannot take that mess of mixed unidentified spam and ham and use it for anything. Ted On 08/16/16 01:03, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Hi Marc, Back

Re: I have some bad news

Hi Marc, Back in 1994 I was diagnosed with testicular cancer, it was essentially "stage 4" as it had metastasized throughout my body. But, it responded to chemo and here I am today. In fact ironically my original oncologist died a few years ago - on a fishing trip he had an accident and

Re: Abused accounts

ities outside of work are fair game. So, I think your fighting a losing battle - in another generation the statement "you can't just use your own random @gmail.com account for business purposes" will have absolutely no meaning. Ted On 3/16/2016 1:11 PM, Dave Warren wrote: On 2016-0

Re: Abused accounts

On 3/15/2016 6:26 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 15 Mar 2016, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: we have scripts checking any samples against current bayes classification and ignore them if they already have BAYES_99, Is this even necessary? I thought the learner automatically rejected everything

Re: Abused accounts

On 3/15/2016 2:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 15.03.2016 um 22:24 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Baloney - spamoney!!! I do not use autolearning, and ALL my spam is either hand-selected or it comes from honeypot addresses that have NEVER been on my domains - I get these honeypot addresses

Re: Abused accounts

On 3/15/2016 5:14 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: a lot of nosense * nobody is talking about throw away *any* other rules Uh, why yes, they are: "Some other systems such as isnotspam.com caught some SA rule which DOESENT EXIST ANYMORE in latest SA." sure seems like SOMEONE IS talking about

Fwd: Re: Abused accounts

Baloney - spamoney!!! I do not use autolearning, and ALL my spam is either hand-selected or it comes from honeypot addresses that have NEVER been on my domains - I get these honeypot addresses by scanning the mail log and looking for guesses by spammers - when I see a popular address in the

Re: Abused accounts

On 3/15/2016 2:01 PM, David B Funk wrote: IE, out of the 130KB of that message, only a few dozen bytes is actually the spam 'payload' and thus Bayes wise gets swamped by the O365 noise. I'm considering tagging most of the O365 headers with bayes_ignore_header. Anybody else wrestling with

Re: Rules needed...

schrieb Martin S: On Friday 26 June 2015 17.40.04 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: But, putting RBL checks into the MTA is the best way I know to piss off your users since tag-and-forward is not an option on MTA rbl checking. That's why we all do our RBL checks in spamassassin. Could you elaborate

Re: Rules needed...

filtering when your NOT a giant email provider? Far smarter to build a system that can take full advantage of being small when you ARE small!!! Ted On 6/29/2015 9:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.06.2015 um 18:29 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Of course, Postfix fixes everything from AIDS to global

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

for sending customer mails, when the load balancers are showing the existing cluster needs expanding, we add more into the cluster, so I cant see anyone stupid enough to use a service blocking new IP's, if they do, they deserve all the hell they bring upon themselves :) On 27/06/2015 02:43, Ted

Re: Rules needed...

On 6/29/2015 9:48 AM, Charles Sprickman wrote: On Jun 29, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 29.06.2015 um 18:29 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Of course, Postfix fixes everything from AIDS to global warming, it's the greatest MTA ever invented.eyeroll for other

Re: Rules needed...

On 6/29/2015 10:39 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.06.2015 um 19:28 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: The days of squeezing every last CPU cycle out of something are long, gone Reindl. nonsense I really appreciate that your bound and determined to keep that 80486 server running but nobody else

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

about the new Internet and they would get that expression of why would anyone want that Ted {^_^} Joanne On 2015-06-29 10:16, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: On 6/27/2015 4:02 AM, Noel Butler wrote: Although what you describe is a workaround, the key is to keep your house in order so you don't get

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Heh Heh Heh Heh Heh Since you and Charles have obviously never done this before why do you feel qualified to comment? Go ahead and not do this based on these logic castles you have built that are not founded on any experience of reality. Your customers will be suffering for a few days while

Re: Rules needed...

Are you running a centralized Bayes with some honeypot addresses feeding it? A search of your messages log should give you plenty of bogus email addresses that the botnet has been probing for on your system. Pick some of the obvious ones and set them up as feeders to Bays and that should take

Re: Rules needed...

On 6/26/2015 10:53 AM, Dave Wreski wrote: On 06/26/2015 12:45 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote: Alex Regan skrev den 2015-06-26 18:33: http://pastebin.com/FzUkEvRp blacklist_from *@*.allisonarctictrips.com spf-pass take responselily Yes, after it's received, there are a ton of things that

Re: Barracuda / EmailReg.org protection racket? (OT, but help?)

Hi Jered, I'm not a Barracuda customer myself I can only report my own interaction with them. I run several public mailservers. 1) I don't run public mailing lists and if I ever was going to do that I would run them on a separate server with a separate IP address 2) I don't run my webserver

Re: Which milter do you prefer?

spamass-milter I don't have enough hours in the day to troubleshoot some effing stupid incompatibility between the latest version of SA and the latest version of BrandX milter that crops up when SA is updated, nor to listen to the complaining while the milter is offline while I'm fixing it.

Re: Which milter do you prefer?

want to avoid the usual distro based dependency parties Yeah, right! Now your the one looking to start a holy-war... Must be something in the water! Or maybe it's just Friday... Ted On 3/13/2015 3:19 PM, Axb wrote: On 03/13/2015 10:41 PM, Shane Williams wrote: I've been reviewing the

Re: Which milter do you prefer?

All this, of course, after searching high and low for a milter, proxy, or some other contraption that would allow me to clone a mail stream to a totally separate server without disrupting the original stream (like port spanning or a network tap, but for SMTP), Need a better Search Engine,

Re: ancient perl versions

for the car accident you didn't cause? Just asking. Ted On 12/5/2014 12:24 PM, jdow wrote: Charmingly polite again, eh Ted? Surely you can do better, young man. {+_+} On 2014-12-05 01:46, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: The problem is Roundcube. It does not insert soft line breaks as per the MIME Quoted

Re: ancient perl versions

, jdow wrote: Charmingly polite again, eh Ted? Surely you can do better, young man. {+_+} On 2014-12-05 01:46, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: The problem is Roundcube. It does not insert soft line breaks as per the MIME Quoted-Printable encoding. There's a lot of MIME stuff that Roundcube doesn't do

Re: ancient perl versions

The problem is Roundcube. It does not insert soft line breaks as per the MIME Quoted-Printable encoding. There's a lot of MIME stuff that Roundcube doesn't do very well, it's just not a very good web mail interface. I'm always surprised at how vehemently people defend it. Many email

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 12/2/2014 5:32 PM, LuKreme wrote: I have *never* considered Barracuda to be reliable. At least they have stopped their practice of listing my server and then sending me spam offering to sell me their crapware to keep it off blacklists for per month. I think there's a direct

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

On 12/3/2014 7:38 AM, Jim Clausing wrote: What I haven't noticed anyone else mention is that I was getting that error message even though the perl on my Ubuntu 14.04 system is 5.18.2. No, they mentioned it - the problem is that the proposed fix to allow inclusion of the new fancy rules

Re: ancient perl versions

On 12/3/2014 6:28 AM, Greg Troxel wrote: I am really boggled by people wanting to run LTS versions of code with old versions of tools and expecting to run newer versions of other things. Microsoft thinks like you do, that's why Internet Explorer 8 was the last version of IE to run on

Re: ancient perl versions

On 12/4/2014 6:24 PM, Noel Butler wrote: On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 20:22 -0600, Dave Pooser wrote: strange, it indicates 12pt, and looks same size when returned on list as everyone elses, something must be a miss, hows this one? it's from evolution That one looked significantly larger in my

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 12/2/2014 6:19 AM, LuKreme wrote: On Dec 1, 2014, at 10:28 PM, Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: This is assuming of course that your instantly blocking everything from a sender that happens to email a honeypot. Right. That i the *point* of a honeypot. The only thing going to a

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 12/2/2014 9:31 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 12/2/2014 12:24 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: On 12/2/2014 6:19 AM, LuKreme wrote: On Dec 1, 2014, at 10:28 PM, Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: This is assuming of course that your instantly blocking everything from a sender

Re: cronjob warning perl_version (SOLVED)

, 2014, Ted Mittelstaedt t...@ipinc.net mailto:t...@ipinc.net wrote: If you have 3.4 then: Fetch the patches with the commands: wget http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm?r1=1642207r2=1642206pathrev=1642207view=patch http

Re: cronjob warning perl_version (SOLVED)

Locate will not show files that a user has set private (or root has set private like /usr/local/certs/machineprivatekey.key It would have likely worked for this - but it's too difficult for me to attempt to prove a negative (prove a file does not exist) when I'm using a tool that is written to

Re: Finding files (was Re: cronjob warning perl_version (SOLVED))

On 12/1/2014 8:57 AM, David F. Skoll wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2014 08:51:26 -0800 Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: Locate will not show files that a user has set private (or root has set private like /usr/local/certs/machineprivatekey.key On my system, updatedb lets you set a flag to

Re: cronjob warning perl_version (SOLVED)

On 12/1/2014 10:55 AM, Bob Proulx wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Locate will not show files that a user has set private (or root has set private like /usr/local/certs/machineprivatekey.key There are at least three versions of locate all with different behavior with regards to file

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 12/1/2014 8:47 PM, Noel Butler wrote: On 02/12/2014 09:07, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 01.12.2014 um 23:46 schrieb Franck Martin: On Nov 26, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net mailto:h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: Am 26.11.2014 um 19:45 schrieb Franck Martin: My

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

This issue has been discussed here: http://askubuntu.com/questions/554537/argument-perl-version-isnt-numeric-in-numeric-ge-at-eval-534-line-1 There is a link to patches for 2 Perl modules that turn off the warnings. Worked for me when I applied those patches. Ted On 11/30/2014 4:42 AM,

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

On 11/29/2014 8:39 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.11.2014 um 23:27 schrieb John Hardin: However, it is a *warning*, not a fatal error. And it's better than the rule killing lint and blocking sa-update completely on an install that uses an older perl

Re: cronjob warning perl_version (SOLVED)

If you have 3.4 then: Fetch the patches with the commands: wget http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf/Parser.pm?r1=1642207r2=1642206pathrev=1642207view=patch; -O parser.pm.patch wget

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

Now now, be nice! This issue affects ANY piece of OSS software that has multiple dependencies. SpamAssassin has HUNDREDS of dependencies on different Perl modules. Using your nasty logic if the author of Perl::Date or whatever decided to make a change that broke SA than it's our tough luck,

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

On 11/30/2014 10:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 30.11.2014 um 19:44 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: This issue has been discussed here: http://askubuntu.com/questions/554537/argument-perl-version-isnt-numeric-in-numeric-ge-at-eval-534-line-1 There is a link to patches for 2 Perl modules

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

On 11/30/2014 11:06 AM, jdow wrote: On 2014-11-30 10:48, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: On 11/29/2014 8:39 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Sun, 30 Nov 2014, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.11.2014 um 23:27 schrieb John Hardin: However, it is a *warning*, not a fatal error. And it's better than the rule

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

this program? I save my nastiest screaming for companies like Microsoft who not only periodically screw me over but they make me pay them to do it!!! Ted {`,'} On 2014-11-30 11:07, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Now now, be nice! This issue affects ANY piece of OSS software that has multiple

Re: Argument perl_version isn't numeric

On 11/30/2014 12:09 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 30.11.2014 um 20:50 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: When the fix to allow older SA versions to silently accept the new rule updates is a simple TEXT modification of 2 text Perl modules, you are overreacting no - i react correctly * the problem

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 11/24/2014 12:30 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: the world is not black and white and by *blindly* blacklist you gain nothing than damage This is absolutely correct, Reindl. It is why ALL domain names that MY COMPANY accepts mail from HAVE WEBSITES on them. You send email to

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 11/25/2014 11:24 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 25.11.2014 um 18:53 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: It is why ALL domain names that MY COMPANY accepts mail from HAVE WEBSITES on them don't get me wrong but that is just stupid a website was enver, is not and will never be a prerequisite

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 11/25/2014 11:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 25.11.2014 um 18:53 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: I see people like you every day who are CONVINCED they can deal with greyness in the world by a machine. Poor fools that they are, they are the ones who construct elaborate voice auto responder

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 11/23/2014 2:12 AM, Aban Dokht wrote: On 22.11.2014 22:05, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: That's a lot of work, there's a much easier way Just search your /var/log/maillog for user unknown messages, and create email addresses for the unknown users which are showing up multiple times over

Re: Honeypot email addresses

On 11/23/2014 2:17 AM, Aban Dokht wrote: On 22.11.2014 22:32, Dave Funk wrote: Another way to seed spamtrap addresses is to make up some and then feed them into unsubscribe links in spam sent to regular users. I've got some of those I started that way 15 years ago and they're still going

Re: Honeypot email addresses

That's a lot of work, there's a much easier way Just search your /var/log/maillog for user unknown messages, and create email addresses for the unknown users which are showing up multiple times over multiple days. It's a great trick because it gets spammers who already have email addresses in

Re: procmail

I think that one of the things that up and coming Linux admins are supposed to do is write a Procmail is dead article and post it somewhere. It sure seems like it there's enough of them out there. Procmail isn't dead. However, the Procmail website is simply in an awful and atrocious state. It

Re: procmail

On 10/28/2014 5:31 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 29.10.2014 um 01:23 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: I think that one of the things that up and coming Linux admins are supposed to do is write a Procmail is dead article and post it somewhere. It sure seems like it there's enough of them out

Re: procmail

On 10/28/2014 7:10 PM, David F. Skoll wrote: On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 01:31:51 +0100 Reindl Haraldh.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: frankly in times of LMTP and Sieve there is hardly a need to use procmail - it is used because i know it and it just works - so why should somebody step in and maintain

Re: Site-wide bayes and individual bayes

On 10/12/2014 9:59 AM, LuKreme wrote: On 10 Oct 2014, at 06:49 , RWrwmailli...@googlemail.com wrote: And, if not, is it generally better to do sitewide? It's hard to say, there are advantages and disadvantages either way. OK, so specific example then. Small server with a few dozen email

Re: Training Bayes On A Gateway

I collect spam this way, periodically I scan the mail logs looking for unknown user entries and sort the results - usernames/email addresses that are repeatedly being guessed get an alias entry added that forwards the spam to a spam mailbox. I have about 20 of these now that are aliased to

Re: SA works great!

On 9/3/2014 11:13 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 03.09.2014 um 19:16 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 9/2/2014 1:52 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 22:32 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 9/2/2014 4:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: just get a proper MTA, enable debug logging and watch

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 1:52 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 22:32 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 9/2/2014 4:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: just get a proper MTA, enable debug logging and watch the commands / responses between client and server due a message transmission and to make it clear

Re: SA works great!

tripe you levelled at Ted. Karsten already warned you once, I suggest you remember that. On 03/09/2014 06:52, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 22:32 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 9/2/2014 4:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: just get a proper MTA, enable debug logging and watch the commands

Re: SA works great!

On 8/31/2014 5:11 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 31 Aug 2014, at 08:08 , Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: Google does it. It's not impossible. [snip] My experience is that the commercial providers like Gmail are now so aggressive that false positives are VERY common on their systems, this

Re: SA works great!

On 8/31/2014 4:46 PM, Bob Proulx wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Reindl Harald wrote: i think it's impossible to improve that much out-of-the-box because that would make it to sensitive while the bayes has the ham side of your communication too for decisions Google does it. It's

Re: SA works great!

On 8/31/2014 7:55 AM, Axb wrote: On 08/31/2014 04:08 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: Out of the box the default decision point of 5 is too high anyway. SA is the framework - you can tune to your need as much as you want. I think the emphasis on avoiding false positives in the stock (non-Bayes

Re: SA works great!

On 8/31/2014 7:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.08.2014 um 16:08 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 8/31/2014 2:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.08.2014 um 02:15 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Yes, it does work great when you have the bayes filter turned on and you take the time to feed

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 2:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 09:57 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 8/31/2014 5:11 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 31 Aug 2014, at 08:08 , Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: Google does it. It's not impossible. [snip] My experience is that the commercial

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 3:48 AM, Axb wrote: On 09/02/2014 12:37 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I'm just saying that out of box it should catch more spam and assume people will tolerate a few FPs. Because that is what I am seeing people demand in the real world. This insistence that if SA is responsible

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 3:54 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 12:37 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 9/2/2014 2:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: and here you prove again that it don't work really out-of-the-box because if i have to look all day long in my spam folder because a noticeable part of my

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 3:48 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 12:15 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 8/31/2014 7:35 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.08.2014 um 16:08 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: On 8/31/2014 2:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.08.2014 um 02:15 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Yes

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 4:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 02.09.2014 um 13:54 schrieb Reindl Harald: Am 02.09.2014 um 13:43 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: as explained above: * the users don't want to see clear spam at all * in many countries *you must* reject before-queue * frankly, where i live for drop

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 12:19 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 02 Sep 2014, at 01:57 , Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: On 8/31/2014 5:11 PM, LuKreme wrote: On 31 Aug 2014, at 08:08 , Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: Google does it. It's not impossible. [snip] My experience is that the commercial

Re: SA works great!

On 9/2/2014 1:45 PM, David F. Skoll wrote: On Tue, 02 Sep 2014 13:32:26 -0700 Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: The point of blocking on DNS or IP based blocking is to issue that error 5xx because that is the ONLY thing that is going to cause the spammer to delist. You are an

Re: SA works great!

On 8/31/2014 2:21 AM, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.08.2014 um 02:15 schrieb Ted Mittelstaedt: Yes, it does work great when you have the bayes filter turned on and you take the time to feed it. And that means you have to feed the learner both ham and spam and setup reliable sources for those

Re: SA works great!

Yes, it does work great when you have the bayes filter turned on and you take the time to feed it. And that means you have to feed the learner both ham and spam and setup reliable sources for those. Unfortunately if Bayes is not turned on, it does not catch more than around 60-70% of spam.

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/15/2014 9:08 PM, Linda A. Walsh wrote: I was wondering if anyone had any experience in showing their ISP the light... Oh well Linda, is your email domain tlinx.org? I'm assuming that it is because there is an under construction web page on that domain and I cannot imagine a

Re: Advice sought on how to convince irresponsible Megapath ISP.

On 8/17/2014 7:37 AM, Linda Walsh wrote: Karsten Br�� wrote: Similarly, your scripts do not reject messages, but choose not to fetch them. === No... fetchmail fetches them, sendmail rejects them because they don't have a resolvable domain. My sorting and

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

On 8/5/2014 4:01 PM, Bob Proulx wrote: Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: What do other people do? Or are we just going to end up with an Internet in about 10 years where every single email box is either on Microsoft 365 or Gmail and the NSA has a wonderful interface to use to hunt through whatever

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

On 7/28/2014 4:17 PM, Jay Plesset wrote: My church decided to go with O-365, without even evaluating any alternatives. We have an unemployed IT person that talked the staff into this, even though I've offered to implement a real e-mail solution multiple times, and even provide hardware to run

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

On 7/29/2014 10:11 AM, Bowie Bailey wrote: On 7/29/2014 12:33 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I learned after a year that if your goal is to have people who don't understand or appreciate what you do for them, and shit all over what you do for them, volunteer for a church. Depends on the church

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

? On 7/29/2014 11:13 AM, Asai wrote: My question regarding all of this interesting topic is, isn't there some kind of RBL or something which can be subscribed to for a nominal fee per year that can aid the small IT shop in maintaining spam filters? --Asai On 7/28/14 9:10 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

On 7/29/2014 12:44 PM, David F. Skoll wrote: On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:37:00 -0700 Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote: Hotmail/MSN/Live/Microsoft/365/whatever-the-name-o-the-week-they-call-themselves all have SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER spam filtering than Spamassassin+free/public RBLs+some

  1   2   3   4   >