Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-06 Thread Don Armstrong
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005, Joerg Sommer wrote: > Does this mean you drop spam, currently? No, we pack it in neat little mailboxes with the greatest of care, and then proceed to blissfully forget that those messages were ever received unless someone wonders why their message never made it through. Then,

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-06 Thread Joerg Sommer
Hello Blars, Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> I've been working on the spam filtering for the BTS. We are getting >>> over 100,000 spams/day and about 50/day get through the filte

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-05 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>>I have also noticed tickets submitted to the bug facility that are >>>spam. Can that facility be configured so that if the format (packa

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-05 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 05, Joerg Sommer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Drop not, but reject. It would be the best, if you can reject spam in > the SMTP dialog. Actually it's the only possible solution, a 100K msg/day backscatter source would be quickly widely blacklisted. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Descriptio

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-05 Thread Joerg Sommer
Hello Blars, Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>I have also noticed tickets submitted to the bug facility that are >>spam. Can that facility be configured so that if the format (package >>name, version, etc) is not followed; the b

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-05 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >Blars Blarson wrote: >> I've been working on the spam filtering for the BTS. We are getting >> over 100,000 spams/day and about 50/day get through the filters. > >are these numbers available somewhere? (the spam/day ratio for example) >it w

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-05 Thread Filippo Giunchedi
Blars Blarson wrote: [snip] > > I've been working on the spam filtering for the BTS. We are getting > over 100,000 spams/day and about 50/day get through the filters. are these numbers available somewhere? (the spam/day ratio for example) it would be interesting to graph the data. filippo --

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-05 Thread Francesco P. Lovergine
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 08:47:21PM -0700, Blars Blarson wrote: > spamscan is single-threaded, and the latency of DNSBL lookups is the > main delay. We have less than 1 second to process each message on > average. Any good recomendations for a perl inter-process > communications library? Once it b

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-04 Thread Florian Weimer
* Blars Blarson: > On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 06:59:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> CBL has the advantage that you can make a local copy of the list >> (which reduces name server load and avoids the name lookup latency), >> but its license is somewhat non-free. Is this a problem for Debian? > >

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-04 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 04, Marc Haber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >spohr is already running a nameserver, so it would have to run on an > >alternate port. > Maybe a DNS view only visible from localhost could be used. No, the point is to use a fast special-purpose daemon instead of BIND. It can be easily run on 1

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-04 Thread Marc Haber
On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 20:47:21 -0700, Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 06:59:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: >> CBL has the advantage that you can make a local copy of the list >> (which reduces name server load and avoids the name lookup latency), >> but its license

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-03 Thread Blars Blarson
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 06:59:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > CBL has the advantage that you can make a local copy of the list > (which reduces name server load and avoids the name lookup latency), > but its license is somewhat non-free. Is this a problem for Debian? spohr is already running

Re: Spam on the BTS

2005-09-03 Thread Florian Weimer
* Blars Blarson: > Would it be acceptable to reject or drop more non-spam? (We could > reject on CBL, getting rid of about half the spam and rejecting about > one non-spam per day. CBL is easy to get off of.) CBL has the advantage that you can make a local copy of the list (which reduces name

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-02 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> Would it be acceptable to reject or drop more non-spam? (We could >I am uncomfortable with dropping any mail, but I encourage a sensible >policy to reject spam. Sorry if I did not make it clear before, we already are dumping 100,000 mess

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-02 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Sep 01, Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would it be acceptable to reject or drop more non-spam? (We could I am uncomfortable with dropping any mail, but I encourage a sensible policy to reject spam. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Spam on the BTS (was: Spam on this list)

2005-09-01 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >I have been noticing (and a bit irritated) at the spam I am seeing >on this and some other email lists. Others have commented on this, I have little to add to this part. >I have also noticed tickets submitted to the bug facility that are