Mate Wierdl wrote:
> Well, with qmail you just drop it on the floor---no copying. In any case,
> I just put in a filter which does not allow attachments with .pi or .pif
> extensions.
Thanks, Mate.
> Of course, there is an ultimate solution to the virus/spam problem on my
> end... Time is better
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 06:20:27AM +1030, Darren Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 02:16, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:35:29AM -0500, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> > > > I actually have a lin
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:35:29AM -0500, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> > I actually have a line for that addres in my filters that catches both
> > the direct spam and the stuff that comes here. The only address I've
> > been both
On Tue, 2003-01-28 at 02:16, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:35:29AM -0500, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> > > I actually have a line for that addres in my filters that catches both
> > > the direct spam
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 05:27:55PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> I just noticed that his continued presence is starting to piss
> Angus> me off ;-)
>
> This is not spam, but a virus:
> http://www.f-prot.com/virusinfo/sobig_a.html
I tend to forget the difference.
I there any from a
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> This is not spam, but a virus:
> http://www.f-prot.com/virusinfo/sobig_a.html
Indeed, and as John mentioned in an earlier thread about this, we loose
nothing if we ban all mails with *.pif or *.pi attachments.
Jürgen.
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> How do we contact Mate to get him to filter out all these
Angus> messages from big at boss dot com. I though that he had a spam
Angus> filter set up. In fact, he must do because this irritating
Angus> bugger is the only one to get t
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 03:39:32PM +, Angus Leeming spake thusly:
>
> How do we contact Mate to get him to filter out all these messages
> from big at boss dot com. I though that he had a spam filter set up.
> In fact, he must do because this irritating bugger is the only one to
> get throu
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 03:39:32PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> How do we contact Mate to get him to filter out all these messages
>> from big at boss dot com. I though that he had a spam filter set
>> up. In fact, he must do because this irritating bugger is the
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:41:18PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:35:29AM -0500, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> > I actually have a line for that addres in my filters that catches both
> > the direct spam and the stuff that comes here. The only address I've
> > been both
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:35:29AM -0500, Dr. Richard E. Hawkins wrote:
> I actually have a line for that addres in my filters that catches both
> the direct spam and the stuff that comes here. The only address I've
> been bothered to do that for (thouhg once I get a few minutes to
> understand on
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 03:39:32PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> How do we contact Mate to get him to filter out all these messages
> from big at boss dot com. I though that he had a spam filter set up.
> In fact, he must do because this irritating bugger is the only one to
> get through more th
How do we contact Mate to get him to filter out all these messages
from big at boss dot com. I though that he had a spam filter set up.
In fact, he must do because this irritating bugger is the only one to
get through more than once.
I just noticed that his continued presence is starting to pis
13 matches
Mail list logo
