On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 1:27:25 PM, Jim wrote:
JM Is anyone else seeing a huge amount of spam increase over
JM the last couple days. Most is being caught by sniffer but the
JM overall number of messages especial foreign language spam messages
JM seems to be very high.
You are probably
MatuskaSent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 01:27 PMTo:
sniffer@SortMonster.comSubject: [sniffer] New Spam
Storm
Is anyone else seeing a huge amount of spam
increase over the last couple days. Most is being caught by sniffer but
the overall number of messages especial foreign language spam messages seems
]
To: Jim Matuska sniffer@SortMonster.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] New Spam Storm
On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 1:27:25 PM, Jim wrote:
JM Is anyone else seeing a huge amount of spam increase over
JM the last couple days. Most is being caught by sniffer but the
JM overall
Matuska Jr.Computer Tech2, CCNANez
Perce TribeInformation Systems[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From:
Andy Schmidt
To: sniffer@SortMonster.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:41
AM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] New Spam
Storm
Yes, these messages were caused
On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 1:44:30 PM, Jim wrote:
JM Pete,
JM Is there a possibility of setting up another return code for
JM situations such as this such as a blacklist rulecode that only has
JM rules for messages such as these that should be blacklisted
JM immediately. I wouldn't mind setting
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 11:54 AM
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] New Spam Storm
On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 1:44:30 PM, Jim wrote:
JM Pete,
JM Is there a possibility of setting up another return code for
JM situations such as this such as a blacklist rulecode that only has
JM rules for messages
On Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 2:57:44 PM, Jim wrote:
JM Thanks Pete, would you be able to provide the current false positive rates
JM for the return codes?
This is not something that we are formally capturing at present,
however anecdotally I can't recall the last time we had an FP
submitted for the
Pete,
Your memory fails you :) I reported one just yesterday, however it was
understandable. The rule is below (slightly obfuscated for public
consumption).
MB Final
MB RULE 349776-055: User Submission, 13 days, 3.1979660500
MB NAME: Account and Password Information are
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kirk Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 2:56 PM
To: sniffer@SortMonster.com
Subject: [sniffer] new spam storm?
Seems like I've been getting a ton of spam in the last few days that's
been scored as either LOW or CLEAN, many
many of them for ... my cheating wife.
Sorry to hear about your marital problems.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Kirk Mitchell
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 05:56 PM
To: sniffer@SortMonster.com
Subject: [sniffer] new spam storm
I've noted that dictionary attack type spam is generally of this
variety, and while you are probably blocking a great deal of this, the
sheer volume makes it look like you aren't doing that well against it.
I've also noted that the domains that they use are frequently changed,
thus escaping
On Tuesday, January 4, 2005, 6:06:00 PM, Rick wrote:
RR I've sure been seeing it. My db updates are triggered off email update
RR notices from sniffer, so I know I have the latest.
RR Feels like something's gone wrong with sniffer due to the year change.
We are definitely experiencing a spam
At 06:03 PM 1/4/2005 -0500, Andy Schmidt wrote:
many of them for ... my cheating wife.
Sorry to hear about your marital problems.
LOL! Apparently the tramp's been sleeping all over, and there are plenty of
websites that can show me how, where, when, and with whom. Darned if I know
when she's
On Tuesday, January 4, 2005, 6:13:24 PM, Matt wrote:
M I've noted that dictionary attack type spam is generally of this
M variety, and while you are probably blocking a great deal of this, the
M sheer volume makes it look like you aren't doing that well against it.
M I've also noted that the
14 matches
Mail list logo
