on Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 10:51:06AM +1000, Andrew Pollock ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 01:45:18PM +0300, Richard Braakman wrote:
I think virus scanners are in a different class, though. Mailing list
software isn't designed to recognize viruses, while virus scanners
Andrew writes:
The (granted, commercial) SMTP virus scanners that I've had experience
with don't allow you to modify the notification behavior on a per virus
signature basis, it's either all on or all off.
The signature file sent out by the vendor should tell the scanner whether
or not to send
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 09:20:53AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
The comparison to mailing list software makes no sense.
Maybe not in the context of viruses, but for the Joe Job problem it does.
Viruses can and should be filtered out before they reach the C-R system.
--Adam
--
Adam McKenna
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 07:12:47PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
Hmm, how about giving tmda its own special header so we can auto-filter
out messages from people who use C-R systems?
It adds itself to X-Delivery-Agent, so it's not hard to filter out. I've
started capturing C-R signatures where I
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 02:55:35PM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
How many were challenges from mailing list software? Yes, another class of
software that automatically issues challenges (specifically, to new
subscriptions and to non-list members if the list is closed). So I guess you
should
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 08:59:04PM -0700, Joshua Kwan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 01:51:58PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It's a bit extreme but I'm sick of deleting such messages, especially in
light of the Blaster worm.
Not extreme at all.
I imagine there are some legitimate
on Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 09:20:53AM +1000, Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 07:55, Adam McKenna wrote:
My own inbox supports this statement. 140 responses to Sobig.F mails,
of which 43 are virus or other content-based autoresponders, and 97
being delivery
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 09:20:49PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
The virus responses are irresponsible, and have been for almost two years
as the number of sender-spoofing emails has grown.
BTW, amavisd-new has
# Treat envelope sender address as unreliable and don't send sender
# notification
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 07:55, Adam McKenna wrote:
My own inbox supports this statement. 140 responses to Sobig.F mails,
of which 43 are virus or other content-based autoresponders, and 97
being delivery failure messages or other autoresponders (e.g.: ISP help
desk).
How many were
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 11:37:57AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
If someone is to Joe-Job me then I'd rather that mailing lists bounce the
messages, if it gets bad I could filter out all mailing list messages
temporarily.
Hmm, how about giving tmda its own special header so we can auto-filter
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 09:47, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 09:20:53AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
The comparison to mailing list software makes no sense.
Maybe not in the context of viruses, but for the Joe Job problem it does.
If someone is to Joe-Job me then I'd rather that
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 09:20:49PM +0100, Karsten M. Self wrote:
on Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:37AM -0700, Adam McKenna ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Also, I don't have any hard data to support this, but it's obvious to
me that the volume of mail generated by virus scanners in response to
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:12, Joshua Kwan wrote:
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 11:37:57AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
If someone is to Joe-Job me then I'd rather that mailing lists bounce the
messages, if it gets bad I could filter out all mailing list messages
temporarily.
Hmm, how about giving
On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 01:51:58PM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
It's a bit extreme but I'm sick of deleting such messages, especially in
light of the Blaster worm.
Not extreme at all.
I imagine there are some legitimate people I might receive emails from,
reply to them and never know it
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 09:26:34PM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 08:30:05AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] has been quarantined!
You only need to do this once, but this time, you must verify
that you are a human.
I almost wonder
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 08:30:05AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] has been quarantined!
You only need to do this once, but this time, you must verify
that you are a human.
I almost wonder if someone sent this intentionally in light of the
TDMA bug thread.
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:39:43 -0700, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, it does present a very good example of poorly written C-R software.
Paul should switch to TMDA.
In which way would have TMDA avoided sending a challenge to the
header-from: of a sobig.f instance?
Greetings
Marc
--
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 08:20:52AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:39:43 -0700, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, it does present a very good example of poorly written C-R software.
Paul should switch to TMDA.
In which way would have TMDA avoided sending a challenge
Le jeu 28/08/2003 à 10:03, Adam McKenna a écrit :
In which way would have TMDA avoided sending a challenge to the
header-from: of a sobig.f instance?
TMDA doesn't send challenges to From: addresses, it sends them to the
envelope sender (Return-Path) address.
Nice, but sobig.f also forges
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:37AM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 08:20:52AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 21:39:43 -0700, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Yes, it does present a very good example of poorly written C-R software.
Paul should switch
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 08:30:05AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] has been quarantined!
You only need to do this once, but this time, you must verify
that you are a human.
I almost wonder if someone sent this
on Thu, Aug 28, 2003, Adam McKenna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So, I guess we should add virus scanners to the list of verboten software.
How about we qualify that; virus scanners that stupidly send email ?
P.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The IWETHEY project: http://www.iwethey.org
pgp0MEXmH8lzK.pgp
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:37AM -0700, Adam McKenna wrote:
Also, I don't have any hard data to support this, but it's obvious to me
that the volume of mail generated by virus scanners in response to Sobig.f
eclipses the volume of TMDA challenges by at least a factor of 10. So far,
I
on Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 01:03:37AM -0700, Adam McKenna ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Also, I don't have any hard data to support this, but it's obvious to
me that the volume of mail generated by virus scanners in response to
Sobig.f eclipses the volume of TMDA challenges by at least a factor of
24 matches
Mail list logo
