Does the spamassassin infrastructure support RBL lookups based on
forward confirmed RDNS? For example. I have a white lists based on good
host names. What would a rule look like that looks up these host names
from my DNS list?
domain.com.hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com = 127.0.0.1
Andre wrote:
Hi,
we run Exim (4.69) with mail scanned at smtp time via acl. We put an
external spamd server to work (works fine).
Now we want to extend that setup by permitting another mail server (Exim,
same setup) to connect to the spamd server. However, that transport has to
happen over
to accomplish this?
Marc
these links:
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/WritingRules
http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.2.x/doc/Mail_SpamAssassin_Conf.html
meta SYMBOLIC_TEST_NAME boolean expression
Define a boolean expression test ...
Thanks for the hint.
It works now.
Marc
RW schrieb:
I think the test needs to end in /m if you want to use ^ otherwise it'll
see all the headers as one big string and only match when it's the first
header.
I tried so much, it must have been gone by the time I was testing.
But Karsten already helped me out.
Thanks
Marc
I would be willing to maintain an RBL type list of freemail domains if
this would be useful. I could set up a VPS for the front end and provide
several servers and lots of bandwidth for a backend.
Steve Freegard wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm doing an experimental free MX backup service and wondering if it
will get exploited. I'm wondering if I'm overlooking anything obvious?
Here's the info on it:
http://www.free-mx-backup.com
The idea is that it detects if we are the secondary
RobertH wrote:
I'm doing an experimental free MX backup service and
wondering if it will get exploited. I'm wondering if I'm
overlooking anything obvious?
Here's the info on it:
http://www.free-mx-backup.com
The idea is that it detects if we are the secondary and not
the primary MX
I'm doing an experimental free MX backup service and wondering if it
will get exploited. I'm wondering if I'm overlooking anything obvious?
Here's the info on it:
http://www.free-mx-backup.com
The idea is that it detects if we are the secondary and not the primary
MX and will store and
Filter on upper case GOD BLESS.
Igor Chudov wrote:
http://igor.chudov.com/tmp/spam006.txt
Not sure what will follow, maybe asking $250 processing fee or
something. Obviously I am not in the mood to write to this guy.
Looking few a few domains to test and automated MX backup service with
some spam filtering. What you do is this. Add these two MX records as
your two highest MX records.
mail.example.com 10
mxbackup1.junkemailfilter.com 20
mxbackup2.junkemailfilter.com 30
And in theory it will just work. If
Just a thought on blacklists. Has anyone tried mining the IP data from
HTTP servers that use modsecurity? I'm wondering if the same computers
that are spamming blogs are also spamming with email? Would this be a
new way to catch spammers?
My fault - never mind. I was doing something wrong.
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 21:23 -0800, Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm trying to get collaborate.com off of the URIBL list and I've
submitted it for removal several times and nothing happens.
Log in to your URIBL
I'm trying to get collaborate.com off of the URIBL list and I've
submitted it for removal several times and nothing happens. Does anyone
know why removal doesn't work?
Thanks in advance
I think I have it all ready to go. Looking for some volunteers to test
my new email backup service. Contact me privately if you're interested.
I'm looking for people with:
1) No greylisting - unless you exempt *.junkemailfilter.com from your
greylisting. If you do that I want at least one
Bill Landry wrote:
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Marc Perkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 12:04 AM
it's WORKING
Well,
it hangs my SA 3.2.4 setup on waiting for a reply from ctyme.ixhash.net .
The strange thing
Tell me if you think this is a good idea.
I'm thinking about offering a free MX backup service that people without
backup servers can use. I'm thinking about doing this as a way of
promoting my spam filtering business because users will see a
significant reduction in spam and might want to
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tell me if you think this is a good idea.
I'm thinking about offering a free MX backup service that people without
backup servers can use. I'm thinking about doing this as a way of promoting
my spam
I'm experimenting with a new list. Been testing it for a couple of
months. Got a radical idea.
The problem with lists like Day Old Bread which lists new domains that
spammers use is that there's a delay between when they are activated and
when they are listed. It's just too hard to get a list
SM wrote:
At 11:51 02-12-2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
Tell me if you think this is a good idea.
Everything that helps to promote your business is a good idea. :-)
Thanks - but there are some other benefits to me. It will help enhance
my black lists which will make them more useful
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Thanks Aaron, that is a good point. But I'm running Exim and I think
I can code it so that it will not generate backscatter. I'll have to
design that in up front.
Interesting, how would you do that without dropping email (which is BAD).
Rick
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rick Macdougall wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Thanks Aaron, that is a good point. But I'm running Exim and I think I
can code it so that it will not generate backscatter. I'll have
it's WORKING
Dirk Bonengel wrote:
OK, I found the bug.
I just released a fixed release. Thanks to Lars Uhlmann for finding
the culprit and delivering a fix.
Problem was the regular expression checking the IP returned if it
belongs to the 127.x.x.x range.
Hmm, I had this working
RobertH wrote:
If the recipient is bad then no one would have got the email
anyway. But there wouldn't a a notification to the sender. I
suppose I could make it smarter so that if the message is
blessed in one of my many white lists then I would do a
bounce message, otherwise not.
I noticed this morning that I also had 0 ixhash hits. Is something wrong?
Rose, Bobby wrote:
Has anyone who switched to 1.5 of iXHash received any hits? I haven't seen any
since switching. One thing that I've noticed is if I pass the same message
thru SA using the old iXhash, the hash is
Hi Dirk,
I'm not getting any hits on the new version either.
Dirk Bonengel wrote:
Folks,
as some of you already noticed I f... up the last (1.5) release of the
iXhash plugin.
Plain simple a wrong regular expression practically disables hash #1.
I just uploaded a fixed version to
I noticed the size of my black list dropped by more that 1/3 this last week.
?
I still maintain my position. Good for point or two, but way too many big
legimate smtp gateways and listservers listed for my traffic. Almost 30% of
hits are FPs. Marc has good ideas, but the execution is lacking.
http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-usersm=120611144819910
If we had
Jan Doberstein wrote:
Wolfgang Zeikat schrieb:
Do others also see that effect with ctyme.ixhash.net?
yes, thats why i added
ixhash_timeout 10
to my configuration (maybe hardware/bandwith on ctyme will be upgraded)
regards
jd
For what it's worth I'm the one who is providing
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For those
of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new domains,
as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often don't have
data from all the registries. So - here's a different solution.
What I'm
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
domains, as you know there's a lag time in the data and they often
don't have data from all the registries. So - here's
McDonald, Dan wrote:
Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 09:23:45AM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 10:14 -0400, Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 18:18 -0500, Len Conrad
McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 15:44 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't know how this will work but I'm building the data now. For
those of you who are familiar with Day old bread lists to detect new
domains, as you know there's
Blaine Fleming wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Why is it so flippin' difficult to get a feed of newly-registered
domain names?
Because the TLDs hate giving people access to the data and certainly
won't provide a feed without a bunch of cash involved. Even worse,
all the ccTLDs pretty much
I've been working with Blaine Flemming and he's compiling his own DOB
data and I'm publishing it for him. I'm throwing it out there to see if
any of you find it as useful as I am finding it. The list can be
accessed as follows:
hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com = 127.0.0.6
What I'm catching is
Looking from opinions from people running rbl blacklists.
I have a list that contains a lot of name based information. I'm about
to add a lot more information to the list and what will happen is that
when you look up a name you might get several results. For example, a
hostname might be
I just discovered the Day old Bread list of host names under 5 days
old. I don't know where they get it but the list is very useful.
As many of you know I also track hosts that don't use the QUIT command
to close connections. So it occurred to me that if a domain is less than
5 days old AND
Great minds think alike. :)
What I'm doing is a modification of this. I'm using the Day old Bread
list but only adding IF they also skip the QUIT to close the connection
AND I'm subtracting out my white list.
Curtis LaMasters wrote:
This is quite an interesting trick. Never actually thought
Blaine Fleming wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I just discovered the Day old Bread list of host names under 5 days
old. I don't know where they get it but the list is very useful.
I remember playing with this list a few years ago but now they seem to
lag a few days behind. For example
Blaine Fleming wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Blaine Fleming wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I just discovered the Day old Bread list of host names under 5
days old. I don't know where they get it but the list is very useful.
I remember playing with this list a few years ago but now they seem
For those of you who want to experiment I've created a new dnsrbl list
of IP addresses and host names that use QUIT to close connections and
those who do not use QUIT. I have found that there are a few legitimate
senders who are skipping using QUIT to close.
Here's the rules. I have about 5
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 10:59 PM, RobertH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was explained somewhere earlier in the thread that he sometimes has
to reboot his central dns servers and he apparently doesn't run local
caching servers on the individual MX/SA nodes.
I have to say
Well, the code works for me. If someone has a better solution I'll
switch to yours. I just created it because I needed it and thought I'd
share it with others who might need it. But if any of you want to
improve it or replace it with something better I'm always looking for
new tricks.
Here's something I threw together to make sure the /etc/resolv.conf
points to a working nameserver. I run this once a minute. It checks to
see what name servers are up and creates /etc/resolv.conf. As you all
know SA and mail servers need the first nameserver to always be working.
#!/bin/bash
Marc Perkel wrote:
Here's something I threw together to make sure the /etc/resolv.conf
points to a working nameserver. I run this once a minute. It checks to
see what name servers are up and creates /etc/resolv.conf. As you all
know SA and mail servers need the first nameserver to always
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 28.08.08 08:41, Marc Perkel wrote:
Here's something I threw together to make sure the /etc/resolv.conf
points to a working nameserver.
do you have problems with nameservers? Do you run own one?
I guess that setting timeout, rotate and attempts
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
We have 4 DNS servers behind L3 switch
that monitors DNS servers...
This script is a poor man's L3 switch. :)
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Matus UHLAR - fantomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I guess that setting timeout, rotate and attempts options in resolv.conf
could help you more than such script
Nice tip, but there's no option that will back off from a dead DNS.
Of course timeout/attempts and
Getting a lot of these:
spamd: bad protocol: header error: (closed before headers) at
/usr/bin/spamd line 2001.
Not sure what this means. Thanks in advance for your help.
Robert Schetterer wrote:
Marc Perkel schrieb:
Hi everyone,
I'm launching a free spam reduction service to help build up my
blacklists. It involves adding a fake high numbered MX record to your
existing MX list that points to one of our servers. We always return
a 451 error but we have
Graham Murray wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Robert Schetterer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
thats could be seen as a security risk
cause in rare cases you may recieve legal mails
i.e at an network outage etc
How? He tempfails all mails.
Because some senders
Ken A wrote:
Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
* Robert Schetterer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Project Tarbaby helps you reduce spam and helps us build our
blacklist. This is done by adding a fake MX record to your existing
MX lists
thats could be seen as a security risk
cause in rare cases you may
Postini's contract to the one you get from Marc?
Ummm.. just in case you have no luck finding that, what about a
Privacy policy?
See the link at bottom of
http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Project_tarbaby
for the Privacy Policy. It's currently a blank page. That doesn't give
me a secure
Aaron Wolfe wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Marc Perkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You continue to miss the point, or maybe you just don't want to understand it.
Sending my client's email to your servers is irresponsible at best and
possibly even a violation of contract or illegal
Hi everyone,
I'm launching a free spam reduction service to help build up my
blacklists. It involves adding a fake high numbered MX record to your
existing MX list that points to one of our servers. We always return a
451 error but we have a very good way of detecting virus infected spam
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm launching a free spam reduction service to help build up my
blacklists. It involves adding a fake high numbered MX record to your
existing MX list that points to one of our servers. We always return a
451 error but we have a very good way of
We are harvesting data for our blacklists. Do you have an old dead
domain that gets a lot of spam? We could use it. Just point your MX
record to us.
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com
Here's the details of what we are doing with it. It also covers using us
as your fake highest MX record.
Whoops - Here's the real link.
http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Project_tarbaby
Marc Perkel wrote:
We are harvesting data for our blacklists. Do you have an old dead
domain that gets a lot of spam? We could use it. Just point your MX
record to us.
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com
Hi everyone,
I'm launching a free spam reduction service to help build up my
blacklists. It involves adding a fake high numbered MX record to your
existing MX list that points to one of our servers. We always return a
451 error but we have a very good way of detecting virus infected spam
I'm referring to the Hostkarma list from junk email filter.
http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Spam_DNS_Lists
What is the procedure/requirements to make this happen? I have 4 servers
running rbldnsd.
Questions
What kind of license do I need to provide to be SA compatible?
What
There's people out there who are better and faster programmers than I
am. I need a simple utility written We can post it on the SA Wiki when
we're done.
I don't care what it's written in but I'm thinking that xinetd might be
easiest. What I want is something to record the IP address of any
Ramprasad wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
There's people out there who are better and faster programmers than I
am. I need a simple utility written We can post it on the SA Wiki
when we're done.
I don't care what it's written in but I'm thinking that xinetd might
be easiest. What I want
be.
Jonas Eckerman wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I don't care what it's written in but I'm thinking that xinetd might
be easiest. What I want is something to record the IP address of any
host connection to port 25.
You don't really need to accept the connection. Just logging
connection attenmpts
Christopher Bort wrote:
This is really not a SpamAssassin issue, but since this list is
populated by people who are interested in spammer behavior, I'm
throwing it out for comment. If it's too far off topic, my apologies
and I'll let it go at that.
At $DAYJOB I run a mail server and a name
Just a quick sendmail question I'm asking for a friend. If they want to
make sendmail listen on port 2525 instead of 25 - what do they meed to
change? Email me privately off list.
Thanks in advance
Matthias Leisi wrote:
Marc Perkel schrieb:
Has anyone determined if ASN information is useful in determining if
a message is/is not spam?
Unfortunately, it does not seem to be *that* useful:
http://matthias.leisi.net/archives/176-Where-does-your-spam-come-from.html
-- Matthias
May I suggest that the test for reply_to and email addresses in the body
of the email be separate routins and separate rules and separate scores.
Also perhaps there should be a rule to see if the from is freemail but
no freemail in received headers. For example, from is yahoo.com but no
yahoo
Has anyone determined if ASN information is useful in determining if a
message is/is not spam?
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
On 7/2/2008 6:05 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
Is there an easy way to detect the registrar of a domain through DNS?
For example - can I easilly figure out if an email I'm processing is
hosted by GoDaddy or Tucows?
Here's what I'm thinking. I think there's some expensive
Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 10:48:07AM +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 03.07.08 11:35, Henrik K wrote:
I'd like to encourage people to take more advantage of DNSWL.
I'm currently converting DNSWL entries into trusted_networks and using
shortcircuited
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 03.07.08 13:22, Henrik K wrote:
If lesser registrar means that it's probably ham, why couldn't someone use
that to add some negative scores or use it as a part of whitelist
trustworthiness? Even if it's handful of domains, it's useful. If you could
get the
Michele Neylon wrote:
On 2 Jul 2008, at 19:56, Marc Perkel wrote:
Again - it's not to figure out where spam comes from. It's figuring
out where non-spam comes from. I think there are registrars out there
that don't have any spam domains registered.
What are you trying to prove
Richard Frovarp wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
Michele Neylon wrote:
On 2 Jul 2008, at 19:56, Marc Perkel wrote:
Again - it's not to figure out where spam comes from. It's figuring
out where non-spam comes from. I think there are registrars out
there that don't have any spam domains
Is there an easy way to detect the registrar of a domain through DNS?
For example - can I easilly figure out if an email I'm processing is
hosted by GoDaddy or Tucows?
Here's what I'm thinking. I think there's some expensive and highly
secure registrars out there who are the registrar of
John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008, Marc Perkel wrote:
Is there an easy way to detect the registrar of a domain through DNS?
For example - can I easilly figure out if an email I'm processing is
hosted by GoDaddy or Tucows?
Registrar != hosted by.
Here's what I'm thinking. I think
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 17:05, Marc Perkel wrote:
Is there an easy way to detect the registrar of a domain through DNS?
For example - can I easilly figure out if an email I'm processing is
hosted by GoDaddy or Tucows?
Even if it was possible I don't think its
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 18:46, Marc Perkel wrote:
Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 17:05, Marc Perkel wrote:
Is there an easy way to detect the registrar of a domain through DNS?
For example - can I easilly figure out if an email I'm
I'd like to suggest an additional feature for the freemail plugin. If
you test the sending host through FCrDNS and determine that the sending
host is a freemail hostname (like google.com) then you should consider
it a freemail sender. Thus if the sending host is Google, but the
reply-to or an
Henrik K wrote:
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:37:13PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
I'd like to suggest an additional feature for the freemail plugin. If
you test the sending host through FCrDNS and determine that the sending
host is a freemail hostname (like google.com) then you should
Daniel J McDonald wrote:
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 10:19 -0400, Randy Ramsdell wrote:
ram wrote:
I am seeing a clear downtrend in the number for spams hitting our
servers, I am not sure why ? Since Last week spams are at 50% of what
they used to be last month. Is this what you all are
.example.com 30
Marc F.
..Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is to come..
-Rev1:4
Marc Ferguson wrote:
Hi,
I'm a linux noob and a spam assassin noob so please reply in
simplified language. Thanks.
I saw on the wiki a trick to use fake mx records in order to weed out
spam (http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/OtherTricks). I'm using
Evolution at home and on my laptop
What would cause this?
Jun 10 11:21:29 spamd0 spamd[20360]: Odd number of elements in hash
assignment at
/usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Mail/SpamAssassin/BayesStore.pm line 322.
Jun 10 11:21:29 spamd0 spamd[20360]: Use of uninitialized value in list
assignment at
Actually - I just need your spam attempts. I have a way to detect
spambots on the first try and add them to my blacklist at
hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com
Sp - if you want to participate and lose a chunk of your virus spambot
spam all you have to do is add us as your highest numbered MX
Randal, Phil wrote:
We should be marking ALL such behaviour as phishing and hope that the
banks (etc) finally get a clue.
I certainly wouldn't trust my money with an outfit that was that
clueless about security.
Cheers,
Phil
Actually in some ways this leads to an interesting idea. In
Here's a short list of banks often spoofed in phishing scams. I'm using
this list as follows:
If the FCrDNS matches one of these domains it is ham.
If the sender or from address matches one of these domains and the
domain doesn't appear in the Received headers - it's a phish.
If anyone has
Patrick McLean wrote:
royalbankofcanada.com
This is the wrong URL for the Royal Bank, it appears to be a domain
camping site. Generally RBC's emails come from rbc.com, they also own
royalbank.com, royalbank.ca, rbcroyalbank.ca and rbcroyalbank.com.
Also you can add:
desjardins.com
I get
In the freemail plugin rather that listing all the domains in the plugin
I propose a network of DNS servers that list the names using rbldnsd. We
also have a central location where we maintain the list. That way the
list can be updated faster and people have current information. I
suggest
Henrik K wrote:
On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 08:09:40AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
In the freemail plugin rather that listing all the domains in the plugin
I propose a network of DNS servers that list the names using rbldnsd. We
also have a central location where we maintain the list
Robert - elists wrote:
Since they seem to have zillions of outbound mx machines
I did this in response to some email latency issues.
dig google.com txt
google.com. 31 IN TXT v=spf1
include:_netblocks.google.com ~all
then i
dig _netblocks.google.com txt
Henrik K wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 11:25:19AM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
I've also created a DNS based list of domains that provide consumer
dynamic IP address space. I'm using this list internally but thought I'd
make it public in case others can use it.
Trying to inspire
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I've also created a DNS based list of domains that provide consumer
dynamic IP address space. I'm using this list internally but thought
I'd make it public in case others can use it.
Trying to inspire innovation.
Example:
dig
I now have a name based DNS lookup for freemail domains. If anyone finds
this useful let me know.
example:
dig yahoo.com.freemaildomains.junkemailfilter.com
I've also created a DNS based list of domains that provide consumer
dynamic IP address space. I'm using this list internally but thought I'd
make it public in case others can use it.
Trying to inspire innovation.
Example:
dig comcast.com.isphosts.junkemailfilter.com
This list was created by
Ken A wrote:
Marc Perkel wrote:
I've also created a DNS based list of domains that provide consumer
dynamic IP address space. I'm using this list internally but thought
I'd make it public in case others can use it.
Trying to inspire innovation.
Example:
dig
I started collecting host names where the registry barrier part of the
FCrDNS is the same as the registry barrier part of the helo. I don't
know what it's good for - if anything - but looking for ideas as to what
to do with it. Just have a gut level feeling that I'm on to something here.
mouss wrote:
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
start by updating the RFCs.
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 7, 2008, at 9:17 AM, mouss wrote:
what if he comes back later to the same MX, again and again (AFAIK,
this is the case with qmail)? mail will be lost.
snarky comment
Good. Time for qmail to die ;-)
/snarky comment
Agreed. Qmail should die!
Hi everyone, I'm back from vacation and want to pick up where I left
off. I had offered to let anyone use one of my hosts.
tarbaby.junkemailfilter.com
as your highest numbered MX. The idea being that I would always return a
451 error. You would gain some spam reduction and I would gain
continuing
This project is targeted mostly at harvesting the IP addresses of virus
infected spambots. First - some background.
I virus infected spambot sends email differently than SMTP servers and
there is enough difference that they can usually be detected on the
first attempt to
701 - 800 of 1295 matches
Mail list logo
