Title: Message
I
really couldn't help laughing at discovering spam this morning through an open
relay at: mail.kcpd.org
Kansas
City, MO Police Department
Where's SPAMCOP when you need them.
George
Kulman
Partner
Ridge
Systems, L.L.C.
Thursday, September 26, 2002 you wrote:
T But they're doing it the wrong way, both in concept and execution.
The big problem I see with Spam-Cop is the area of web site URL's
contained within user provided e-mail messages.
When I receive a notice from Spam-Cop that someone has reported a
I'm
also a newbie with JunkMail as I've only been using it for a week. What I did
was setup an email account called "spam" and I set a couple of tests, BADHEADERS
ORDB,to route any emails it caught to that mail account. I can then
review the mail to see if any legitimate emails was caught
More often than not, the web site customer is culpable. IOW, they were
either the spammer in disguise or they commissioned the spam, in order
to drive traffic to their web site -- usually to sell something.
For that reason, we extensively use the Declude filter file to list
those URLs, as well
I set up a email called spam as you
suggested.
And change theto: fields in the Emails to go
there.
Thatseems that is working fine.
Some one else suggested to make everything
log. But
what do I use to review this files?
I'm also not really sure what all the
definitionsmean on the
How affective is scanning at multiple Hops? I'm not setting HOPHIGH right now...but
I'm currious if the people who are using it are seeing its benefits, or if it is
causing them any problems.
And what is the recommended HOPHIGH setting (assuming HOP is set to 0)?
Bill
---
[This E-mail was
I use a difference of 3
HOP 0
HIGHHIGH 2
i love it...
I know of at least 1 server where they know their server is an open relay,
so they have their server set to send all outbound mail to another smtp
server which is not to get around open relay blocks, i still block them,
beecause they are hop
Bill,
Mine is set to 2 (for a total of 3). I started at 0, then 1 and found that spam still
got around my filters that would have been caught at 2. I changed it to 2 4+ months
ago and haven't looked back. Your mileage may vary. I haven't seen a need to set it
at 3.
Dan
On Thursday,
Hello All,
So far I've been very happy with JunkMail. I'm only running a few tests and
it's catching a lot of spam and porn. However, I'm noticing the occasional
legitimate email from badly formatted clients. For example, JunkMail caught
a confirmation email from an online service that one of my
I do it by a weight system. Thee are a few of the tests that really
have less value in catching legitimate spam. For instance if you give
a heavy weight to noabuse, you will not receive any mail from Microsoft
as they do not want the emails telling them they are screwing up so
therefore they do
So far I've been very happy with JunkMail. I'm only running a few tests and
it's catching a lot of spam and porn. However, I'm noticing the occasional
legitimate email from badly formatted clients. For example, JunkMail caught
a confirmation email from an online service that one of my co-workers
Thanks guys...sounds like I should have been using this setting earlier. I'll start
it out at 1 like Dan suggested and bump after watching it for a while.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Dan Patnode
Sent: 26 Sep 2002 13:02:47 -0700
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] HOPHIGH
Bill,
Mine
PROTECTED]
SMTP LOG:
20020926 163043 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (0D740042) [64.236.243.243] EHLO
weabsunprd12.weac.com
20020926 163044 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (0D740042) [64.236.243.243] MAIL
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@mx.digical.com
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http
Mail from one of our users continuously fails the MAILFROM test, but I'm
not sure that it should be failing. The only funny thing this message has
is the mail server hostname appended to the end of the address, but I
thought that was valid.
No, it isn't valid:
X-Note: Sent from [EMAIL
Hello all
I have Junkmail running and it has cut down on the spam somewhat I am
still getting a lot of spam so I though I would give Message Sniffer a try I
installed it about 24 hours ago and it has catauh a large amount of the
message that I was getting as spam. The problem that I am
Instead of whitelisting, try giving those names a negative value. That
way if you do get some real spam from that domain, you will still have
other values or weights to use to catch it. If you whitelist, nothing
is even checked and it goes through regardless.
Jim Rooth
Klotron, Inc.
For now, you will want to whitelist these. The trouble is that many lists
append advertising content to their messages. Sniffer tends to get triggered
by the advertising content.
Next month we plan to release a version that includes compound heuristics.
At that time we will begin adding
Thanks Scott, I meant to say SPAMHEADERS in lieu of BADHEADERS...to
ya'll I was RFC ignorant...you had to figure the rest of the ignorance
out on your own...LOL
Me thinks you have been spending too much time around a truck stop again
Jim. The diesel fumes are getting to you again.
:-)
John
18 matches
Mail list logo
