no Perkel, everthing posted is not necessarily acceptable, helpful and/or
relevant.
especially when spamming the list for your tarbaby stuff, free or not.
So I must not be the only one tired of this.
Q
no Perkel, everthing posted is not necessarily acceptable, helpful and/or
relevant.
especially when spamming the list for your tarbaby stuff, free or not.
On 25.08.10 09:08, wrote:
So I must not be the only one tired of this.
there are more of us, I just didn't want to complain in the
On ons 25 aug 2010 17:52:18 CEST, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote
So I must not be the only one tired of this.
there are more of us, I just didn't want to complain in the public, yet.
and now we did :(
--
xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Agreed. Seems to me that any discussion related to blocking
spam is relevant.
no Perkel, everthing posted is not necessarily acceptable, helpful and/or
relevant.
especially when spamming the list for your tarbaby stuff, free or not.
it appears to me that you used to be a lot more
On 08/18/2010 10:14 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
[...] They were discussing ways to reduce spam and I mentioned it. [...]
I believe, that 95% of the discussion in this list is about reducing
spam in a way or another.
-rsd
On 8/23/2010 2:31 AM, Raul Dias wrote:
On 08/18/2010 10:14 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
[...] They were discussing ways to reduce spam and I mentioned it. [...]
I believe, that 95% of the discussion in this list is about reducing
spam in a way or another.
-rsd
Agreed. Seems to me that any
On tor 19 aug 2010 03:14:50 CEST, Marc Perkel wrote
Now you're going to criticize me for explaining what you just asked for?
moderator did not criticize but say imho just this is not your market place
--
xpoint http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not directly spamassassin related, but can be helpful for
people (I saw here) wondering if they would used the barracuda DNSBL.
When other well
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not directly spamassassin related, but can be helpful for
people (I saw
Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl
are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries , barrcuda lists almost
8000
That's not a problem all by itself, but when combined with this:
Finally there is a special feature that barrcuda
Finally there is a special feature that barrcuda folks call deep scanning
which makes the appliance scans the 'Received' headers and reject the mails
if an IP found in that headers, is listed in the DNSBL... a feature that
should obviously be called: 'even increase my false positive rate'
Finally there is a special feature that barrcuda folks call deep scanning
which makes the appliance scans the 'Received' headers and reject the mails
if an IP found in that headers, is listed in the DNSBL... a feature that
should obviously be called: 'even increase my false positive rate'
Matt lm7...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps for authenticated SMTP not record the IP address in the
headers but rather just the authenticated username in the headers. I
think Squirrelmail does that. Your MTA logs will have the IP recorded
if needed later.
From the browser to Squirrelmail is not
Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 10:53 -0400, Kris Deugau a écrit :
Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl
are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries , barrcuda lists almost
8000
That's not a problem all by itself, but when
The error message from Barracuda is broken too. Sample:
... while talking to barracuda.xprize.org.:
DATA
554 Service unavailable; Client host [tarap.cc.columbia.edu] blocked
using Barracuda Reputation;
http://www.barracudanetworks.com/reputation/?r=1ip=69.86.203.182
554 5.0.0 Service
Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell a écrit :
On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not directly spamassassin related, but can be helpful for
people (I
Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 13:39 -0400, Joseph Brennan a écrit :
The error message from Barracuda is broken too. Sample:
... while talking to barracuda.xprize.org.:
DATA
554 Service unavailable; Client host [tarap.cc.columbia.edu] blocked
using Barracuda Reputation;
Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 12:10 +0100, corpus.defero a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not
On 8/18/2010 4:10 AM, corpus.defero wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 06:36 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
On 8/17/10 7:30 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not directly spamassassin related, but
On 8/18/2010 7:53 AM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl
are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries , barrcuda lists
almost 8000
That's not a problem all by itself, but when combined with this:
Le mercredi 18 août 2010 à 11:27 -0700, Marc Perkel a écrit :
On 8/18/2010 7:53 AM, Kris Deugau wrote:
Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
When other well known DNSBL (I have always heard spamhaus sbl and xbl
are trust worthy) list less at most 50 entries , barrcuda lists
almost 8000
By the way I'm not a big fan of registering my servers to any private
entity in order to improve deliverability.
Register our servers here: www.dnswl.org Do not really use it for
scoring but do not grey list any servers listed.
Matt
στις 18/08/2010 10:03 μμ, O/H Matt έγραψε:
By the way I'm not a big fan of registering my servers to any private
entity in order to improve deliverability.
Register our servers here: www.dnswl.org Do not really use it for
scoring but do not grey list any servers listed.
Matt
Hi ,
On 8/18/2010 12:29 PM, Sergios T.S. ( aka linuxman) wrote:
στις 18/08/2010 10:03 μμ, O/H Matt έγραψε:
By the way I'm not a big fan of registering my servers to any private
entity in order to improve deliverability.
Register our servers here: www.dnswl.org Do not really use it for
scoring
στις 18/08/2010 10:38 μμ, O/H Marc Perkel έγραψε:
On 8/18/2010 12:29 PM, Sergios T.S. ( aka linuxman) wrote:
στις 18/08/2010 10:03 μμ, O/H Matt έγραψε:
By the way I'm not a big fan of registering my servers to any private
entity in order to improve deliverability.
Register our servers here:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:38 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Registering with a white list doesn't reduce spam. It reduces false
positives when you send email.
If you want to reduce spam however you could add this MX record as your
highest numbered MX.
tarbaby. [...]
Ahem.
Marc, your
On the other hand, back to topic, Barracuda rejecting for mail originating
on a dialup line is just crazy. We've seen it too.
And it has been mentioned here, and in other places on the net, before.
Yes, indeed, there appears to be an issue with Barracuda appliances'
configuration in certain
On 8/18/2010 4:46 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:38 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Registering with a white list doesn't reduce spam. It reduces false
positives when you send email.
If you want to reduce spam however you could add this MX record as your
highest numbered
On 8/18/2010 6:14 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
On 8/18/2010 4:46 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:38 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Registering with a white list doesn't reduce spam. It reduces false
positives when you send email.
If you want to reduce spam however you could
On 8/18/2010 9:24 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On 8/18/2010 6:14 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
On 8/18/2010 4:46 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 12:38 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
Registering with a white list doesn't reduce spam. It reduces false
positives when you send
Hi the list,
I am posting the results of my tests in order to have
fedback/feelings/remarqs.
This is not directly spamassassin related, but can be helpful for people
(I saw here) wondering if they would used the barracuda DNSBL.
the problem:
- I have quite often complaints from my customers
31 matches
Mail list logo
