Tom Lane wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Also, I DO run spamassassin here, and it is finding only perhaps 10-20%
> > of the copies of the most recent worm. I think it sends out copies that
> > are sufficiently different from each other that it bypasses all the
> > checks, including a Bay
On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 11:04, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Just run IMAP. That way all the mail stay one the server. Your
> system will just grab the headers and you can delete as required.
> Also you could installed something like spamassassin on the server (if
> you ISP) will let yo
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 12:53:12 -0700,
"Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Thursday, Sept 18 Bruno Wolff said:
> >One option for you is to use the list address in the from header when
> >posting to the list. That will hide your address and not break
> >replies.
On Thursday, Sept 18 Bruno Wolff said:
One option for you is to use the list address in the from header when
posting to the list. That will hide your address and not break
replies. Most likely the list checks the envelope sender address to see
whether or not the message needs moderator approva
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 11:46:11 -0500,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I hope there is a special corner of hell reserved for spammers and an
> even worse corner reserved for virus/worm writers.
Don't you mean for people who use Lookout to read eamil?
---(end of broadcast)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Also, I DO run spamassassin here, and it is finding only perhaps 10-20%
> of the copies of the most recent worm. I think it sends out copies that
> are sufficiently different from each other that it bypasses all the
> checks, including a Bayesian filter.
Hmm. I'v
On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 23:25, Tom Lane wrote:
> expect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> Get a life (or at least a spam-blocker).
Even with spam blockers, the spam/virus still must be downloaded
from the server, and if the person is on dial-up, that can be *most*
painful:
In the 24 hour period
On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 20:59:53 -0700,
expect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I had no idea that my address was being broadcast to the world via
> comp.databases.postgresql.general I have no problem with having messages sent
> to the list go to the group. I do have a problem with my address ou
expect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I do have a problem with my address out there in
> the free and clear.
Get a life (or at least a spam-blocker). What other lists can you
name that have the policies you think are "responsible"?
regards, tom lane
-
