-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: OT: Viruses on lists
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 09:45:51 +0200
From: steef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 10 May 2004 22:22, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> Paul Johnson had the gall to say:
> > "Derrick
On Monday 10 May 2004 22:22, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> Paul Johnson had the gall to say:
> > "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
> > > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager
> > > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know what one mur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jonathan Matthews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > My choice is to simply drop viruses. I don't expect to have any legit
>> > messages falsely identified as viral, and dropping the message simply
>> > removes waste from the network bandwidth and disk
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 02:06:43PM -0400, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote:
> Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager
> (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know what one murphy is
> running). The list manager then counts that against you in its
> determination of whic
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 09:22:41PM +0100, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
> Paul Johnson had the gall to say:
> > "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [snip]
> > > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager
> > > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know wha
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 09:22:41PM +0100, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
| Paul Johnson had the gall to say:
| > "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| [snip]
| > > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager
| > > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know wha
Paul Johnson had the gall to say:
> "Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> > Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list manager
> > (mailman, majordomo, ezmlm, etc. - I don't know what one murphy is
> > running). The list manager then counts that against you
"Derrick 'dman' Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | Since the mail has already been received and accepted by murphy, am
> | I just pushing the sending of spoofed bounce messages one stage back
> | up the email processing ladder?
>
> Almost. murphy generates a bounce and sends it to the list m
On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 09:59:45AM +0100, Jonathan Matthews wrote:
| Evenin' all.
|
| I've installed ClamAV+Exim4 to reject viruses at SMTP time. d-u's
| headers don't seem to mention anything about /virus/ scanning (as
| opposed to SpamAssassin), so I guess I'm ok asking this question here:
|
Jonathan Matthews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm fine with (a) - I think that still holds - but is (b) incorrect when
> dealing with listmail?
I don't believe so. I do it.
> Since the mail has already been received and accepted by murphy, am
> I just pushing the sending of spoofed bounce me
Evenin' all.
I've installed ClamAV+Exim4 to reject viruses at SMTP time. d-u's
headers don't seem to mention anything about /virus/ scanning (as
opposed to SpamAssassin), so I guess I'm ok asking this question here:
The whole point of having virus scanning while the sender still has an
open c
11 matches
Mail list logo