Chris Hoogendyk wrote:
Henrik K wrote:
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 10:07:16PM -0800, Steve Cloutier wrote:
Hi !
Call me -- whatever :-) I took a look at SpamAssassin a while back, and
(at
least at the time), it seemed to scan the mailbox file after the
message(s)
were received
Matt Kettler-3 wrote:
..
Yes, we know that. Our tool is external too.
The only big difference I see is your tool appears to be a quasi
nonstandard milter for sendmail, that interacts with all phases of
delivery.
Personally, I use a combination of milter-greylist for filtering
Jari Fredriksson wrote:
I just wanted to come up with
something that blocked spam
at the protocol level (so the spammer gets an error!!!),
That's all great.. but the reality may be that the spammer still get no
error.
...
H... Well, yes and no :-) Now, it is probably correct
Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
On 08.03.08 18:28, Tuc at T-B-O-H wrote:
Our mail server receives about 128K emails a day. Of
those, 120K are absolutely known spam so I don't even run
them through spamassassin. Of the 8K left, 6K are determined
to be spams, and 2K are considered
Matt-123 wrote:
I have a file that contains a list of all the IP's that have
successfully POP3'ed there email within last 15 minutes. Its used for
POPB4SMTP. Naturally the IP's in the file are constantly changing.
/etc/virtual/pophosts
Is there anyway to setup Spamassassin to
Hi !
Call me -- whatever :-) I took a look at SpamAssassin a while back, and (at
least at the time), it seemed to scan the mailbox file after the message(s)
were received. The program (again, at the time) was written in Perl.
This whole process seemed somewhat inefficient, and also allowed
