> -Original Message-
> So in the case of a timeout, things may slow down, waiting on
> the timeout, and in the case of nxdomain things should
> immediately fail.
> Neither of those cases should impact blocking or scoring
> though. Is that correct?
It seems to me that in the past, ther
Or maybe they just grabbed some random text from the internet. But
check out the subject header of the following spam that got blocked by
ASSP. The body was a standard gibberish-filled GIF pump-and-dump spam.
Their subject line was accurate in this case. ;)
---
Microsoft Mail Internet Headers
> Basically, the idea is that MTA's post the sending IP and get a score
> back. Each time an MTA reports and IP, its score goes up.
> Then you do with what you will with the sender.
This sounds vaguely familiar to what the orginal ASSP Greylist (GreyIPList)
had in mind.
smime.p7s
Description
>which charsets should be blocked:
>eg: GB2312|BIG5|EUC-KR|ISO-2022-CN
Can't we already do this with one of the regexps? I know I did something
similar with our previous anti-spam proxy.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
--
> Hi,
>
> Can it be that something is wrong with the wiki, i am not getting any
> confirmation code send, due to this i cannot contribute to the wiki!
>
>
> Grtz!
I think when I first signed up for the wiki, it took a while to receive my
confirmation email. First, the wiki seemed to take a li
> But if my server hosts several domain names for email
> accounts, wouldn't
> they be local domains?
>
> Etc, kruger.nu is my domain, which i use for my email
> address, my server
> hosts this domain, so aren't this a local domain name?
Yes. And if someone else's server identifies itself as k
> Personally, I think I would Red List the messages. That way the email
> will be Bayesian processed but not enter the corpus. I would most
> likely use the redRe to do this.
Thanks, I'll do that. I did opt to delete the emails in spam/ that came
from the affected mailservers. There were abou
> I've added [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the noProcessing list, but damage has
> already been done to our corpus.
Is this the correct way to do this? [EMAIL PROTECTED] is only listed in
the To: header, but is not the destination of the RCPT command. Does
ASSP check the whole email for noProcessing addr
I've found out that one of our users has set up an email forward from his
university account to his work account here. So all of his mail addressed
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is being forwarded to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The problem
is, all the spam he gets there is being forwarded here, too.
I've added [E
> Second, since the list accepted it, it waltzed right through
> my install of
> ASSP because it was from a whitelisted address. So I have
> obviously put a
> sign on my back that says "kick me".
I have "@lists.sourceforge.com" in my Unprocessed Addresses so none of
the mail from this list gets
sing > is correct.
In my case, I simply reduced PenaltyExtreme from 150 to 149, and it works
fine.
Dan Ratzlaff
Network Administrator
Mental Health Center of East Central Kansas
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
The log entries you show have to do with the Delaying lists, rather than the
email address Whitelist.
The Whitelist populates with email addresses you send to. If you have been
sending emails to people, but their addresses aren't showing up in the
Whitelist, then it's possible that you do not ha
Just upgraded recently to 1.2.5, and am using Net::DNS 0.59 on Linux, perl
5.8.2. Running 2 days with no problems so far.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future
> The greylist adds a value to the spam-probality depending on the IP.
> This is a process inside Bayesian. PB is not focused on content
> related checks like Bayesian.
Okay. I didn't know the greylist was part of Bayesian. That makes sense.
Thanks!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic
te, I do love the new version. Thanks guys.
--Dan Ratzlaff
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Fritz Borgstedt
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 8:22 AM
> To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] dig and windows
>
> I am thinking of replacing
the Penalty Box functionality do?
Are there any issues I should look at when upgrading my 1.1.1 setup to
1.2.5? Can I keep my corpus?
________
Dan Ratzlaff
Network Administrator
Mental Health Center of East Central Kansas
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptogr
17 matches
Mail list logo
