assin
directory ?)...
Thank's
>From Newbie...
David Kandou
>
>
>
>
> Asif Iqbal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/17/2004 04:40:54 PM:
>
>> I am definitely not doing something right. These two following
>> messages slipped through my SA. Any ruleset that I
Dear all,
Iam sorry for this idiot question.. but until now i can't find how to
read manpage for Mail::Spamassassin:Conf..
Can anybody help me...<:(
Thank's
>From Newbie.
David
Thank's
i forgot to use double ":"
. Iam realy so idiot.... <:(
David
>> Iam sorry for this idiot question.. but until now i can't
>> find how to
>> read manpage for Mail::Spamassassin:Conf..
>>
>> Can anybody help me...
Thank's
i forgot to use double ":"
. Iam realy so idiot.... <:(
David
>> Iam sorry for this idiot question.. but until now i can't
>> find how to
>> read manpage for Mail::Spamassassin:Conf..
>>
>> Can anybody help me...
Dear all,
Can anybody help me, my spamassassin on mail server cann't detect this spam
mail(hits only 0.8)
I already put spamassassin rules from sare imporeum to
/etc/mail/spamassassin directory...
Regards,
David Kandou
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAI
Dear all,
I want to upgrade my spamsassassin 2.63 to spamsassassin 3.0, but i found
problem with dependencies:
I Already download all spamassassin 3.0 files :
--> perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-3.0.0-1.i386.rpm
--> spamassassin-tools-3.0.0-1.i386.rpm
--> spamassassin-3.0.0-1.i386.rpm
And when i install s
Thank's a lot
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2004 3:32 AM
Subject: Re: SpamAssassin 3.0
> --On Saturday, August 07, 2004 2:12 PM -0400 Theo Van Dinter
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> And when i instal
Ditto
Regards,
David Hooton
Senior Partner
Platform Hosting
www.platformhosting.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Randle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 26 March 2004 2:07 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Bigevil update with flavor.Adult. And
required hits to 3.0, but no change. I wont filter
mails with 3.0 mails. I think the standard 5.0 is still active. I
changed this in my local.cf, and the other params works (white and
blacklist)
Any idea?
Thanks!! David.
Matt Kettler wrote:
At 11:05 AM 3/30/2004, D. Werner wrote:
I used
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:discuss-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Menschel
> Sent: Friday, 7 May 2004 1:18 PM
> To: Jeff Chan
> Cc: SURBL Discuss; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Re[2]: Bug in Spamcop's surbl add-on module
>
> Hello Jeff,
xy...
Thank you all,
David Borton
Computer Systems Manager
Santa Fe Institute
Hi everybody,
I have seen lots of references to this error, but can someone steer me
in the right direction for FIXING it?
The error is the very popular:
Cannot open bayes databases /home/david/.spamassassin/bayes_* R/W:
tie failed:
Here's what the procmail log says when handling the
actor is at play, because even with the contents
of .spamassassin folder reset to default, SA isn't adding any headers.
FYI, that folder looks like this:
ls -l .spamassassin
total 52
24 -rw---1 davidsfistaff24576 May 18 10:44 bayes_seen
24 -rw---1 david
erly here at this site.
Thanks,
David Borton
Computer Systems Manager
Santa Fe Institute
On May 18, 2004, at 10:49 AM, David Borton wrote:
Thanks to Steve Yuroff and someone else who replied (sorry I deleted
your message). This is a great community.
One suggestion w
/home
for i in */Maildir/.Spam ; do
find $i/{new,cur} -type f -mtime +7
done | xargs -l -i rm -f
The find part seems to ID all the older messages, but xargs doesn't seem to
be removing them. Any ideas? Or a better approach?
David
sages. My users
complain that spam still gets through, when it's actually the viruses (that
have been cleaned and replaced with a txt file called Deleted0.txt)
Please help.
-David
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Byrnand [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 10 June 2004 12:14 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Flooded by spam in German
>
> Anyone else suddenly (last couple of days) getting flooded with spam in
> German ?
We're marking most of it as spam
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Leverton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 11 June 2004 11:10 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Flooded by spam in German
>
> I've got the following additional subject lines since yesterday:
>
> DEUTSCHES MAEDCHEN FAST VERGEWALTIGT
> Gesch
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Peuhkurinen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 11 June 2004 11:18 PM
> To: David Hooton
> Cc: 'Nick Leverton'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Flooded by spam in German
>
> You're absolutely sure that this w
> -Original Message-
> From: Pierre Thomson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, 11 June 2004 11:32 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Flooded by spam in German
>
> I'll adjust the numbers a bit... using David's rule which looks for
> lowercase letters before .qmail@ I see four
Has anyone written a rule to catch this message? The subject is
Powerful weightloss now available for you.
It seems to be the only spam that consistently gets through on all my users
accounts.
-Original Message-
From: Ester E. McKnight [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Menschel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> DH> headerGERMANSPAM MESSAGEID =~ /^<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/
> DH> describe GERMANSPAM Contains German Spam
> DH> score GERMANSPAM 100
>
> Works well here. Haven't had a problem with the german spam her
Tech wrote:
Anyone know of good reporting tool that will report
spam statics?
Check out http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~dws/software/mailgraph
david
--
Ethical axioms are found and tested not very differently from the axioms
of science. Truth is what stands the test of experience.
-Albert Einstein
On 6/18/04 9:41 AM, "Kristopher Austin" wrote:
> Okay, that was just too funny!
>
> I've never seen that before, Spam-I-am!
Excellent Dr Seuss parody :)
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated
great product.
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers
800-399-6441/309-679-0774
On 6/20/04 8:19 PM, "David Thurman" wrote:
> We have tried to run the bogus-virus-warnings.cf rules and when we lint, we
> get major errors. Is anyone else having problems? (sure it's me) I am running
> SA 2.63 on a Debian with a few other rules without any issue.
Sor
Lately we have been seeing more and more timeouts on SA in conjunction with
MailScanner.
What are some tips or places to look or adjust SpamAssassin to not timeout?
Again this is starting to happen in the last 2-3 weeks.
Doing a spamassassin --lint -D shows everything as fine...
--
David
r of .cf files in our
/etc/spamassassin dir. Though we really don't have that many.
We have a fairly healthy machine, 1.75 athlon with 3/4 gig ram and is
strictly gatewaying the mail off to the web/email servers.
Again thanks for the tips... Off to the races and solve this.
--
David Thurman
T
nfig
-rw-r--r--1 root root 961 Jun 17 18:42 spamcop_uri.cf
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers
800-399-6441/309-679-0774
t; Mark
I was crying tears at the pictures, as well as thought the pile of money was
a great touch.
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers
800-399-6441/309-679-0774
Folks,
Anyone know how much this is used? My server doesn't use it, but I see it
in a decent number of spam.
X-UIDL: fB@"!)+h"!#+""!Y$m!!
It's a POP UID identifier (or a derivation thereof).
David.
Maybe he should be kicking a [EMAIL PROTECTED] pill.
[2.5 points for that line alone, I'm sure]
David.
-
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Richard Humphrey wrote:
> Here is something quick that my co-worker came up with. Of course this
> can be improved upon based on what the community want
I thought it was on the SA list, but I subscribe to way too many, but does
anyone have the link to the proposal that Yahoo, Earthlink and others posted
to the community? I think they did it June 22.
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS
On 6/25/04 7:20 AM, "Doug Johnson" wrote:
> Hi David!
>
> This may be what you are looking for, (sorry for top posting):
>
> http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/3/7/23779c05-d409-46ce-b9d6-c249087
> 89d8b/ASTA%20Statement%20of%20Intent.pdf
Doug
That'
OP_URI_RBL,USER_IN_WHITELIST_TO,
> WS_URI_RBL
> autolearn=no version=2.63
Same here, though we have SpamCop URI set a little higher
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=7.8 required=10.0
tests=BAD_CREDIT,INFO_TLD,NO_REAL_NAME,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL,URIB
L_SC_SURBL,URIBL_WS_SURBL
X-Spam-C
ing this, on another list a few boohooed the SpamCop_URI
plug-in claiming that SURBL would blacklist innocent parties.
I will make sure I augment their postings on our list.
Thanks
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicat
On 6/30/04 10:25 AM, "Chris Santerre" wrote:
> Hey Dave! We take FPs very seriously. You don't want to know what happens to
> people who add FPs! I still can't sit down! ;)
:O
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Comm
On 7/1/04 8:19 AM, "jdow" wrote:
> OK, what if a spam company trades publicly?
Get them delisted ;)
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers
800-399-6441/309-679-0774
n we find some of the best things to laugh at and
some of the sickest things to accidentally stumble upon or get tricked on
clicking (Goatse.cx).
--
David Thurman
The Web Presence Group
http://www.the-presence.com
Web Development/E-Commerce/CMS/Hosting/Dedicated Servers
800-399-6441/309-679-0774
lic companies will
>> tend not to be spammers. It's no guarantee of course, but
>> perhaps an increased probability.
>>
>
> This is why you read about sub-sub-sub-contracting for this stuff. It
> give the public company the "plausible deny-ability" card.
So
;m still an educated novice at Linux in general, so I'm looking for some
help as to how to resolve this problem. If anyone could point me in the
right direction, I have no problem doing the research to figure this out, I
just don't really no where to go on this one. Thanks.
Davi
I did try the trick in the article by changing my spamd to point to
/usr/bin/perl5.8.0
But I still get the same error. Any other ideas?
>
>I'm trying to install support for SURBL into my Spamassassin 2.63
>installation. I've downloaded the file and when I run the
>perl Makefile.pl
>command, I ge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm having a problem in that I have spamd started by /etc/init.d/spamassassin
with the "-d -c -u" parameters, but everytime the email client starts the
filter (in KMail, using a filter that just pipes the email into
"/usr/bin/spamc" with no paramete
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 14 July 2004 11:05 am, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:44:00AM -0600, David Bartmess wrote:
> > "/usr/bin/spamc" with no parameters), it starts a brand new spamd
> > process.
>
> Well, ho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 14 July 2004 11:11 am, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 12:44 PM 7/14/2004, David Bartmess wrote:
> >WHY is it taking so long to process each email?
>
> That could be any one of MANY problems.
> 1) are you
dynamic
> data on SC, and the ability to submit to WS make those lists a lot more
> attractive and worthwhile.
I agree,
I'd prefer we spend time on building lists rather than pulling FP's
and being concerned that others may still exist.
What did my mum always say?... Quality before quantity :)
--
Regards,
David Hooton
y boom boom kissy kissy :)
>
> --Chris
Has anyone got any FP stats on this data while using it in Squidguard?
It looks like very useful data, but how is it managed?
Could be very intresting data to have a trial of at least.
--
Regards,
David Hooton
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 21:23:28 -0500 (CDT), David B Funk
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What are the chances that legitmate eBay, CitiBank, PayPal messages
> will contain a URI that uses an IP address rather than proper host names?
> (or contain a link to a ".biz", ".i
ible. Bayes is incredibly good @
catching this stuff.
The long and the short of it is that no one rule is ever going to
solve the problem, you need to have multiple angles of attack to
ensure that you are covering all bases, not just the immediately
obvious ones.
--
Regards,
David Hooton
who find
adult content offensive (churches etc).
I reckon let's give it a go for a while like we did 6dos - what's the
worst that can happen? We might get another SURBL - well more content
is always a good thing in that case :)
--
Regards,
David Hooton
it requires
less resources and only completes one DNS lookup per URL, rather than
checking each URL against a series if regular expressions in a .cf
file
Given the size that Bigevil has recently become I think you'll agree
that one DNS lookup is much better than thousands of regex checks.
--
Regards,
David Hooton
oes anyone know?
David Groce
CCNA
Network Server Analyst/Coordinator
North Kitsap School District
(360) 394-2621
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
e Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 1:59 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Final Release Date for version 3?
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 01:00:58PM -0700, David Groce wrote:
> Is there any tentative date for the final release of version 3. I would
> like to start us
'm not
positive. Would reinstalling from CPAN mess anything up if it was installed
from rpm?
-David
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 2:44 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Final Release Date for version 3?
On Thursday, Ju
: Thursday, July 22, 2004 2:44 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Final Release Date for version 3?
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 2:19:30 PM, David Groce wrote:
> When I run perl Makefile.PL I get
> Can't locate Mail/SpamAssassin.pm in @INC
> I have one file called SpamAssassin.
7;t even find a file
called spamd. Any suggestions?
David Groce
CCNA
Network Server Analyst/Coordinator
North Kitsap School District
(360) 394-2621
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ere wouldn't be
any spamd file from the new install. Now, on to using SURBL's (I hope they
solve my poor spam filtering problems).
-David
-Original Message-
From: Bob McClure Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 12:23 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Whe
Spamd?
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 12:07:34PM -0700, David Groce wrote:
> I'm working on removing my RPM install of Spamassassin, and installing
from
> CPAN. I did the removal, and I successfully installed both Spamassassin
and
> SpamCopURI (the real motivator behind this move) so now
I
need some advice as to where to go from here. I appreciate the help Bob,
I'd be lost without it.
-Original Message-
From: Bob McClure Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 12:58 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Where's Spamd?
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at
found the answer, need the
export LANG=en_US
Ran throught the install just fine.
Thanks again for the help.
-Original Message-
From: David Groce [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 1:16 PM
To: Bob McClure Jr; Spam Assassin List
Subject: RE: Where's Spamd?
I look
riginal Message-
From: Bob McClure Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 1:26 PM
To: Spam Assassin List
Subject: Re: Where's Spamd?
On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 01:22:48PM -0700, David Groce wrote:
> found the answer, need the
> export LANG=en_US
>
> Ran throught
where operator expected at (eval 17) line 686, near "} $self"
(Missing operator before $self?)
Failed to run header SpamAssassin tests, skipping some: syntax error at
(eval 17) line 686, near "} $self"
Any guesses there? Perhaps related to the SpamCopURI plugin?
Davi
TECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff Chan
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 5:19 PM
To: Spam Assassin List; SURBL List
Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: Syntax error on line 1 near eval:
On Monday, July 26, 2004, 4:12:05 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
> On Monday, July 26, 2004, 4:00:53 PM, David Groce wr
List
Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: Syntax error on line 1 near eval:
On Monday, July 26, 2004, 5:30:52 PM, David Groce wrote:
> I can't find the Perl::URI to reinstall. I've reinstalled Spamassassin
> multiple times trying to fix this. If someone can point me to the name of
>
server back into
shape. I appreciate all the help.
David Groce
CCNA
Network Server Analyst/Coordinator
North Kitsap School District
(360) 394-2621
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rthcoming.
:) Yes we're slackers..
> Let's ask David Hooton of MailSecurity to clarify this if he can.
Please also report to postmaster at corp.mailsecurity.net.au with
supporting evidence for now.
--
Regards,
David Hooton
t you're planning?
> This certainly is NOT going to replace the lists in the SURBL, but is
> may also permit that this detection could 'feed' data into the SURBL.
Again, tell me more :)
> Back to a previous point. Since most Phishers are using IP Addresses in
> the Web Link, is there an existing test for this, or do I need to
> develop it?
Reversed octet IP addresses can be fed into SURBL's we use them all
day every day..
--
Regards,
David Hooton
If you look at the detailed cover, it says it covers SpamAssassin version
3.0. I don't know if that means it doesn't cover version 2.63, but it looks
like it will get the latest and greatest. I'll be asking my boss if he'll
buy it for me today.
-David
-Original Message-
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, Jennifer Wheeler wrote:
>
> > > 'Bigevil.cf' -- never once seen in ham.
> > > 'Maybeevil.cf' -- a small number of hits in ham
>
> Here's a suggestion:
>
> Rather than try to filter into two files, leave Bigevil as-is. Place
> questionable domains that appear in Bigevil in
f you need any more copies, I'm sure our spamtraps will
have hundreds shortly.
Regards,
David Hooton
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPAM to:
re
style Nigerian ruleset coming...
Regards,
David Hooton
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPAM to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
. As a matter a fact, the
only reason I am onto this list is to make sure my messages are accepted
and I promis to unsubscribe from this list as soon as this problem is over.
Please help.
--
Thanks.
David Harel,
==
Home office +972 4 6921986
Fax:+972 4 6921986
Ce
ron with a |
mail. It can trivally restart whatever you want at the end. It requires
ksh and a relatively standard set of UNIX tools. And it uses GET.
Enjoy.
David.
- SNIP -
#!/bin/ksh
#
# $Id: rules_update,v 1.8 2004-02-06 23:48:28-05 root Exp $
#
# --
#
# Install directorie
this is normal or not?!
Thanks in advance :)
Regards,
David Hooton
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPAM to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 February 2004 1:34 AM
> To: David Hooton; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: --lint output
>
> That is definitely NOT normal.. what version of perl are you using? Did
> the lint
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 February 2004 2:07 AM
> To: David Hooton; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: --lint output
>
> Step 1) Fix your copy of razor.. All versions of SA 2.60 and higher run in
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 10 February 2004 2:57 AM
> To: David Hooton; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: --lint output
>
> It's not a patch to SA.. it's a patch to razor that comes with SA... Razo
The load has never gone above 4-5, running up to 12 spamassassin
processes in a daemon mode.
David.
-
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Rick Macdougall wrote:
>
>
> Stephen Gran wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I've been lurking here for a little while, and haven't
ure this box could do 4-6 emails/second at peak if it was tuned
for it and I took the other junk off.
David.
-
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Chris Santerre wrote:
>
> Good grief there is some big iron being used :) *server envy*
>
> The only thing I have to offer is get lots of memory.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 17 February 2004 3:16 AM
> To: Mark; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Will SA 2.70 contain SPF?
>
> At 10:59 AM 2/16/2004, Mark wrote:
> >Well, the subject says it all: will SA 2.70 contain SPF?
> >
> >Tha
internal e-mail with
Spamassassin the above setup will filter anything going into a users
mailbox. Can anyone suggest a good method for implementing spam filtering
just for external mail.
David Groce
CCNA
Network Server Analyst/Coordinator
North Kitsap School District
(360) 394-2621
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
a persistant
process, so I need to make sure I get it right.
Thanks,
David.
hing instead of adding the other stuff.
Does it seem to break anything if you call the init() functions multiple
times?
David.
her? Are there others
that I should get. This is a site wide deployment, but I'm noticing that
many people are still getting a couple messages getting through. Thanks for
any advice.
David Groce
CCNA
Network Server Analyst/Coordinator
North Kitsap School District
I've had this problem several times when I fed spamassassin several hundred
messages at once. The only solution I found (admittedly quite an annoying one)
was to blow away the old database files and retrain from scratch - in smaller
increments than previously so as not to break it again.
I have
FWIW we nuke the chicken soup list anyway :)
Regards,
David Hooton
Senior Partner
Platform Hosting
www.platformhosting.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Chris Santerre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 2 March 2004 3:11 AM
> To: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 5:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Atriks spamtraps?
>
> Has anyone got a spamtrap that is reliably receiving spam from Atriks, and
> only spam? If so, would they be interested
2 domains, about 160 users got the following from yesterday:
Report Date : 2004-03-04
Period Beginning : Thu 04 Mar 2004 12:00:00 AM EST
Period Ending: Fri 05 Mar 2004 12:00:00 AM EST
Reporting Period : 24.00 hrs
--
Note: 'ham' = 'nonspam'
. I
thought Id ask if its been done already before I go out and reinvent the
wheel!
Regards,
David Hooton
Pain free spam & virus protection by: www.mailsecurity.net.au
Forward undetected SPA
received-header: relay A.B.C.D trusted? no
* 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS
* [A.B.C.D listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
Is there something different about the policy for this SORBS list?
_
David Watson, Network Manag
ell, this program will only allow X many wrong email addresses to
come from a SMTP server during X amount of time. If they hit the limit, they
get blocked for X amount of time. (All the X's are configurable by you)"
Regards,
David Hooton
Hi Folks,
Last evening I had a problem with spamd processes not ending and driving
CPU usage through the roof.
First, a bayes.lock file would be created; the bayes.lock file process
ID was the same as the spamd process ID above. I would get other lock
files created (bayes.lock.host.name) and many
On Wed, 24 Mar 2004, John Schneider wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> >> high). We use sendmail and I've got it configured with rate
> >> limit thresholds to defend spamd from mail-bomb attacks
> >> (externally or internally generated ;). Reasonable rate
> >> limiting has totally cured our SA from overload de
On Mon, 22 Mar 2004, Smart,Dan wrote:
> PMJI, but...
>
> I've been wondering where the 250K number comes from, and if it is still a
> valid max size? Is message size an indicator of spamminess?
Only insofar as spam tends to be small (spammers go for quantity, not
quality ;). Scanning large messa
On Thu, 25 Mar 2004, Bill Randle wrote:
> I would volunteer the ISP I manage to host a mirror if this is
> implemented. We have plenty of bandwidth.
>
> -Bill Randle
> SysAdmin
> OutlawNet, Inc.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ditto.
--
Dave Funk
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Al Danks wrote:
> hbinc.com> writes:
>
> > 7 occurrences anywhere in the message:
> > /(\b(best|most|more|((best|bett|bigg|larg|fast|quick)(er|est)))\b.*){7}/i
> >
>
>
> Matt,
>
> After a bit of testing I've discovered that the rule doesn't trip when there
> is
> a blank li
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 13:54, mike wrote:
> > Thanks. looks like that is working.
> >
> > Kris Deugau wrote:
> >
> > >bayes_file_mode 0777
>
>
>
>
> They bayes database files are neither directories nor executables; they
> do not need execute permissions.
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Darren Coleman wrote:
> The problem is, SA can only assess the spammyness of an email AFTER the
> headers have been received (i.e. From, To, etc) by which point it would
> be impossible to return a true 550 error.
>
> Daz
It would seem so but the SMTP protocol allows you to r
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Alex Pleiner wrote:
> Well, qmail does per default (i.e. without a patch) accept all messages
> for the domains it handles and sends bounces for non-existent users.
> While this generates extra load, it is not just dumb to do it this way.
Ah, then qmail is a tool that spammer
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004, Tom Emerson wrote:
> well, I wouldn't want to intentionally submit a virus to an e-mail reflector,
> now would I? :) That said, here is the content of the message [sans nasty
> attachment] for your enjoyment:
>
> ---the message
> Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
1 - 100 of 239 matches
Mail list logo
