rry, I don't undersyand. What's an ITP? Take over what?
>
> Intent To Package. i am in the process of packaging spambouncer for
> debian, but i am pressed for time. so if another debian developer
> wants to take over packaging...
Ah, thanks that's anew acronym (sp) f
also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.09.1556 +0100]:
> > i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone
> > cares to take over...
>
> I'm sorry, I don't undersyand. What's an ITP? Take over what?
Intent To Package. i am
>>"Stan" == Stan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stan> Do you have any insight on that?
The last update (and the last message on the mailing list) was
on 22 Aug 2001. I think the author is swamped with RL stuff
(spambouncer updates have been more and
> > > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >. . . I'm pretty agressive in comunicating to people that I desire
to receive mail from how to send "proper" email (eg not hTML etc.)
> > If you have boilerplate -- stock instructions for a general case -- can
> > yo
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 07:55:09PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.07.1652 +0100]:
> > If not, any sugestions as to an alternate?
>
> i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone
> cares to take over...
I'm sorry, I don't und
ccasional
>> valid email.)
>
>Those are all checks done by Spambouncer.
I doubt it comes standardly configured for all the blacklists I
mentioned. BlarsBL has been around less that a year, and the others
mentioned aren't that much older. There was a lot of shuffling of
blacklists
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:26:51AM -0800, Wendell Cochran wrote:
> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 07:02:04 -0500
> From: stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > > > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
>
> >> . . . Mostly SpamBouncer is a spam block
also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.07.1652 +0100]:
> If not, any sugestions as to an alternate?
i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone
cares to take over...
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr
also sprach dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.08.0320 +0100]:
> | Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spammer forged
> | in the headers, hopfully it's dead and won't be revived. If you want to
> | bounce spam, do it in the SMTP session you're receiving the message in.
>
> Oh
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 07:02:04 -0500
From: stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
>> . . . Mostly SpamBouncer is a spam blocker. . . . but it's hard
>> to get it to block all spam without also blocking a lot of le
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:48:55AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| [spamassassin]
| >| The default rule scoring seems pretty far off to me though.
| >Can you expand on this?
|
| (These comments are based on the few dozen mainly spam messages
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 09:37:31AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>"Blars" == Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Blars> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -05
onally,because some lists (such as debian-user)
> receive spam, and I want that filtered out.
>
> > What sorst of messges are you getting "false postives" on? What's
> > SpamBouncer doing with them? Blocj folder?
>
> Block folder, yes. It's quite
> What sorst of messges are you getting "false postives" on? What's
> SpamBouncer doing with them? Blocj folder?
Block folder, yes. It's quite a mix. Some people send mail to lists with
a Big5 or other foreign language indicated in the headers even though
the message i
>>"Blars" == Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Blars> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
>>> Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatine
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 07:47:30PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote:
> begin Blars Blarson quotation:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
> > >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www
ve some problems.
>
> I haven't yet figured out how to configure which DNSBLs are used.
>
> It only seems to catch about 60% of the spam that gets past my other
> filters. (ordb, osirusoft, blarsbl, valid rDNS of relay, valid domain
> in envelope from) (These catch about 90% of t
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>However, I do beleive that if a site is allowing spam to be relayed, it should
>be made well aware of how unpopulat that is.
Yes, but I didn't think that was what spambouncer did. Does it only
send messages back to
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[spamassassin]
>| The default rule scoring seems pretty far off to me though.
>Can you expand on this?
(These comments are based on the few dozen mainly spam messages I've fed
to "spamassassin -t", and some reading of the spamassassin mailin
begin Blars Blarson quotation:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
> >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
> >dunno
>
> Me neither. Since what
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:20:35PM -0500, dman wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:57:02PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
> | In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> | >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
> | >| Anyone know if SpamBounce
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:57:02PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote:
| In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
| >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
| >dunno
|
| Me neither. Sin
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
>| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
>dunno
Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spammer forged
in the headers, hop
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote:
| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
dunno
| If not, any sugestions as to an alternate?
http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/config_docs/exim_spamassassin.html
-D
--
Misfortune pursues the sinner,
but prosperity is
Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined?
If not, any sugestions as to an alternate?
--
"They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
invokes procmail, via the .forward
>file. Procmail uses the spambouncer recipies from spambouncer.org to filter
>the email, and it's either sent to my defaul mailbox, or put into various
>folders.
I would strongly suggest using exim rather than sendmail, for a few
reasons.
1) You need to un
s. Fetchmail then invokes procmail, via the .forward
> file. Procmail uses the spambouncer recipies from spambouncer.org to filter
> the email, and it's either sent to my defaul mailbox, or put into various
> folders.
>
> The problem seesm to lie with sendmail. Basicly all of m
I'm trying to set up a Debian woody system to replicate what I've had
working on a HP-UX box for several years.
Here is how it goes. I use fetchmail to retireve email from several
different POP accounts. Fetchmail then invokes procmail, via the .forward
file. Procmail uses the s
28 matches
Mail list logo
