On 03/16/2015 10:16 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.03.2015 um 03:43 schrieb Dave Warren:
On 2015-03-15 17:26, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.03.2015 um 01:23 schrieb Dave Warren:
On 2015-03-15 15:01, Reindl Harald wrote:
surely, only 5% of incoming spam attempts make it to spamassassin /
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST
scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
http://files.jessen.ch/Tektronix-4-Kanal-Oszilloskop-deutlich-reduziert-TDS-2024C.eml
When the above was processed I noticed this in the log:
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing
URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from
linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
On 03/16/2015 11:43 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:28 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing
URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST scoring on many legitimate mails.
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST
scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
http://files.jessen.ch/Tektronix-4-Kanal-Oszilloskop-deutlich-reduziert-TDS-2024C.eml
When the above
On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST
scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST
scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
http://files.jessen.ch/Tektronix-4-Kanal-Oszilloskop-deutlich-reduziert-TDS-2024C.eml
When the above
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:28 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing
URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from
linkedin and distrelec.
For
On 03/16/2015 11:28 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 11:05 AM, Axb wrote:
On 03/16/2015 10:54 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I've recently upgraded to SA 3.4.0 - I'm seeing
URI_DOTDOT_LOW_CNTRST scoring on many legitimate mails. E.g. from
linkedin and distrelec.
For instance:
On 14 Mar 2015, at 12:55, David F. Skoll wrote:
[...]
I can't answer for Kevin, but what we do is this: For oversize
messages, we remove non text/* attachments. If they're still
oversize, we truncate the text/plain parts. If they're still
oversize, we truncate the text/html parts. We do this
On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:51:59 -0400
Bill Cole sausers-20150...@billmail.scconsult.com wrote:
Is the code for doing this shared anywhere or is it sharable? Please?
It's part of our commercial CanIt software. But I can post a
chunk of Perl that's roughly what we do.
We parse the message into a
On 14 Mar 2015, at 15:17, Robert Schetterer wrote:
[...]
Am 14.03.2015 um 17:55 schrieb David F. Skoll:
[...]
I can't answer for Kevin, but what we do is this: For oversize
messages, we remove non text/* attachments. If they're still
oversize, we truncate the text/plain parts. If they're
On 16.03.15 00:59, Jude DaShiell wrote:
I have been getting large spam messages for several years on one of
my accounts. Since spamassassin cannot handle them, my only recourse
are procmail recipes.
spamassassin CAN handle them. I have ocnfigued spamass-milter to process all
mail (by setting
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:19 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 16.03.15 00:59, Jude DaShiell wrote:
I have been getting large spam messages for several years on one of my
accounts. Since spamassassin cannot handle them, my only recourse are
procmail recipes.
spamassassin CAN handle them. I have
On 13 Mar 2015, at 17:41, Shane Williams wrote:
I've been reviewing the current landscape of anti-spam tools since I
haven't set up a new system in a while, and one place I'm wondering
what people are using is milters for spamassassin/spamc.
It seems like spamass-milter is the default go-to
On 3/15/15, Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Am 14.03.2015 um 20:22 schrieb David F. Skoll:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 20:17:27 +0100
Robert Schetterer r...@sys4.de wrote:
Ok, but big spam mails are extrem rare, i wouldnt invest time in that
They are quite rare, but common enough IMO that our
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:33 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:19 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 16.03.15 00:59, Jude DaShiell wrote:
I have been getting large spam messages for several years on one of my
accounts. Since spamassassin cannot handle them, my only recourse are
Am 16.03.2015 um 19:24 schrieb Robert Schetterer:
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:33 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:19 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 16.03.15 00:59, Jude DaShiell wrote:
I have been getting large spam messages for several years on one of my
accounts. Since spamassassin
On March 16, 2015 10:55:22 AM Per Jessen p...@computer.org wrote:
spamd[865]: dns: new_dns_packet (domain=chde..distrelec.com. type=A
class=IN) failed: a domain name contains a null label
uri with ..
Am 16.03.2015 um 19:30 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 16.03.2015 um 19:24 schrieb Robert Schetterer:
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:33 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 16.03.2015 um 18:19 schrieb Matus UHLAR - fantomas:
On 16.03.15 00:59, Jude DaShiell wrote:
I have been getting large spam messages for several
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Patrick Ben Koetter wrote:
amavisd-new via amavisd-milter.
That what's we got since 2006. Since 2011 spamassassin is second choice
after graylisting (i.e. it rejects what graylisting let through)
Am 16.03.2015 um 03:43 schrieb Dave Warren:
On 2015-03-15 17:26, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.03.2015 um 01:23 schrieb Dave Warren:
On 2015-03-15 15:01, Reindl Harald wrote:
surely, only 5% of incoming spam attempts make it to spamassassin /
clamav here, but you need to keep in mind the
22 matches
Mail list logo
