On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi all,
Few months ago I asked this list if using SA on outgoing smtp was a
good idea (Thread: SA on outgoing SMTP).
This thread quickly moved to Block direct port 25 for non-mta users!
I was really afraid of doing so and didn't really
Hi,
On Mon, 19.07.2010 at 09:43:20 -0600, Brian Godette bgode...@idcomm.com wrote:
I hope you realize you still need to deal with the issues of users
with weak/guessable passwords and phishing of account info as well
as the newer bots that recover account info from Outlook/Outlook
Like some people I run a small internal spamtrap of never used by real
users addresses for use in feeding Bayes as well as reporting to Razor
and internal IXHASH. In addition I also have a database that returns
550 User unknown for all email addresses that are dead, with the
date they were
On 19-Jul-2010, at 10:45, Brian Godette wrote:
My question is, at what point would one consider such an address old enough
for inclusion into a reviewed trap for further training and reporting, and at
what point, if it were left returning 550 User unknown, where it could
bypass review?
On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi all,
Few months ago I asked this list if using SA on outgoing smtp was a
good idea (Thread: SA on outgoing SMTP).
This thread quickly moved to Block direct port 25 for non-mta users!
I was really
Still trying to build my black list (hostkarma) and looking for more
spam. The way it works is that any of you can add this as your highest
numbered MX record.
http://wiki.junkemailfilter.com/index.php/Project_tarbaby
It returns a 421 error after the DATA command. Anything that comes to us
On 7/19/2010 1:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi all,
Few months ago I asked this list if using SA on outgoing smtp was a
good idea (Thread: SA on outgoing SMTP).
This thread quickly moved to Block
On 7/19/2010 12:56 PM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/19/2010 1:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi all,
Few months ago I asked this list if using SA on outgoing smtp was a
good idea (Thread: SA on
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010, Marc Perkel wrote:
Still trying to build my black list (hostkarma) and looking for more
spam. The way it works is that any of you can add this as your highest
numbered MX record.
I'll say it again, Marc: you'd get better response from large sites if you
offered source
Marc,
So then OK what happens when a BGP flap somewhere on the Internet
that isn't even us, cuts us off for 10 minutes and 500 pieces of
legitimate mail end up going to your server?
Domains these days are really, really cheap. Just setup some
honeypots, man.
Ted
On 7/19/2010 12:48 PM,
The tarbaby server can tell the different between legit email and spam
bot mail. It doesn't blacklist everything that hits it. And the good
email will be turned away with a 4xx error.
On 7/19/2010 1:52 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Marc,
So then OK what happens when a BGP flap somewhere on
Blocking outbound 25 from the rest of your network, and disallowing
submission to your MX on 25 from your network
, does very little for keeping your own MX from sending spam which is what SA
on outgoing SMTP would be for.
It's great from a policy standpoint and contains the simple bots, but
Even the best spmfilters we have cannot tell the difference between
legit e-mail and spambot mail 100% of the time.
I know you think that you have a clever way of collecting spambots
since you are depending on a border case. Most of these clever
solutions depend on border cases, it could be
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:25:26 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedt t...@ipinc.net wrote:
It's been our experience that spam-scanning outbound mail causes a lot
more problems than setting up mailserver monitoring and being
responsive to it. Sooner or later one of your customers is going to
call you and
On 7/19/2010 2:25 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On 7/19/2010 12:56 PM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/19/2010 1:29 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On 7/19/2010 8:43 AM, Brian Godette wrote:
On 7/15/2010 6:55 PM, Alexandre Chapellon wrote:
Hi all,
Few months ago I asked this list if using SA on
On 7/19/2010 4:01 PM, RW wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:25:26 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote:
It's been our experience that spam-scanning outbound mail causes a lot
more problems than setting up mailserver monitoring and being
responsive to it. Sooner or later one of your
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:58:49 -0600
Brian Godette bgode...@idcomm.com wrote:
On 7/19/2010 4:01 PM, RW wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:25:26 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedtt...@ipinc.net wrote:
It's been our experience that spam-scanning outbound mail causes a
lot more problems than setting up
On 7/16/2010 2:31 PM, Cliff Hayes wrote:
Hello,
Our webmail server is on the same server as sendmail and spamassassin.
I would like to filter outbound webmail but can't because the most recent
versions of spamassassin have 127.0.0.1 trusted by default.
How can I override this? Or is that
18 matches
Mail list logo
