Hello,
I am tired of spam. I installed spamassassin but doesn't help. So, can
you send me an effective RBL list please?
Regards,
mto
Hi,
> So, can you send me an effective RBL list please?
http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/Blacklists_Compared.html
Hth.
Robert
Quoting Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I am tired of spam.
Like almost everyone else :)
I installed spamassassin but doesn't help.
Have you configured/trained it? My SA is 98% effective, but I use
greylisting which helps a __lot__. Maybe you could try that too.
So, can
you send me an ef
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 12:01:25 -0200
Norberto Bensa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>Personally, I would classify RBL as a totally illegal activity. Those
>f*cking idiots have blocked me way too many times. So no, I won't
>send you a RBL list.
Maybe you could be more specific? Exactly why have
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 12:01:25PM -0200, Norberto Bensa wrote:
> Quoting Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I am tired of spam.
>
> Like almost everyone else :)
>
>
>> I installed spamassassin but doesn't help.
>
> Have you configured/trained it? My SA is 98% effective, but I use
> greylisting whic
note that this is OT but:
Quoting Gerard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Maybe you could be more specific?
more specific in what? one rbl list me and servers using that rbls reject me.
Exactly why have they listed you?
and how would I know that?
I
am sure it is not because they have nothing bett
Quoting Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Also, I have never used greylisting.
I'm using http://postgrey.schweikert.ch/
Can you give me
an example?
smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks
check_policy_service inet:127.0.0.1:6
127.0.0.1:6000 is the postgrey service. You shou
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 03:38:11PM +0200, Tolga wrote:
> I am tired of spam. I installed spamassassin but doesn't help. So, can
> you send me an effective RBL list please?
There is essentially one effective RBL, and then all the rest. While,
with care, you may be able to find some additional RBL
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 02:04:42PM -0200, Norberto Bensa wrote:
> Quoting Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >Also, I have never used greylisting.
>
> I'm using http://postgrey.schweikert.ch/
>
> >Can you give me
> >an example?
>
> smtpd_recipient_restrictions = permit_mynetworks
> check_p
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 12:01:25PM -0200, Norberto Bensa wrote:
> Quoting Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I am tired of spam.
>
> Like almost everyone else :)
>
>> I installed spamassassin but doesn't help.
>
> Have you configured/trained it? My SA is 98% effective, but I use
> greylisting which
Personally, I would classify RBL as a totally illegal activity. Those
f*cking idiots have blocked me way too many times. So no, I won't send
you a RBL list.
This is bad and misleading advice. Just because you are listed on one
or more RBLs does not mean they are bad. Tolga, use zen.
> A couple of dozen regular expressions that match things like "dynamic",
> "home", numeric addresses and similar patterns in /etc/postfix/spam_ip_regex
> in smtpd_client_restrictions cuts the spam and the calls to RBLs way down:
>
> smtpd_client_restrictions =
> permit_mynetworks,
> pe
I've got since a couple of weeks a rather nasty spam increase ( in fact
massive ). Some jerk sends forged emails to some address [EMAIL PROTECTED] on my
server with the same email address as the receiver ( hence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
receives an email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). It's clearly not relay
On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 09:51 -0700, Roland Plüss wrote:
> I've got since a couple of weeks a rather nasty spam increase ( in
> fact
> massive ). Some jerk sends forged emails to some address [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
> my
> server with the same email address as the receiver ( hence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
A couple of dozen regular expressions that match things like "dynamic",
"home", numeric addresses and similar patterns in /etc/postfix/spam_ip_regex
in smtpd_client_restrictions cuts the spam and the calls to RBLs way down:
smtpd_client_restrictions =
permit_m
>
>
>>> Personally, I would classify RBL as a totally illegal activity. Those
>>> f*cking idiots have blocked me way too many times. So no, I won't send
>>> you a RBL list.
>>>
>>
>> This is bad and misleading advice. Just because you are listed on one
>> or more RBLs does not mean they are bad.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I would classify RBL as a totally illegal activity. Those
f*cking idiots have blocked me way too many times. So no, I won't send
you a RBL list.
This is bad and misleading advice. Just because you are listed on one
or more RBLs does not mean
Victor Duchovni wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 03:38:11PM +0200, Tolga wrote:
I am tired of spam. I installed spamassassin but doesn't help. So, can
you send me an effective RBL list please?
There is essentially one effective RBL, and then all the rest. While,
with care, you may be ab
- Original Message
> From: Norberto Bensa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2008 2:01:25 PM
> Subject: Re: RBL
>
> Quoting Tolga :
>
> > I am tired of spam.
>
> Like almost everyone else :)
>
>
> > I installed spamassassin but doesn't he
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:20:24AM -0800, Daniel V. Reinhardt wrote:
> Maybe you should have administrated your server better, ...
- Please don't feed the trolls.
- Please don't digress into polemical discussions here.
--
Viktor.
Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list repl
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 02:25:23PM -0500, Victor Duchovni wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:20:24AM -0800, Daniel V. Reinhardt wrote:
>
> > Maybe you should have administrated your server better, ...
>
> - Please don't feed the trolls.
>
> - Please don't digress into polemical discussi
On Sunday, December 07, 2008 at 18:30 CET,
Terry Carmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
>
> > > smtpd_client_restrictions =
> > > permit_mynetworks,
> > > permit_sasl_authenticated,
> > > reject_unauth_destination,
> > > hash:/etc/postfix/whitelist
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:13:15AM -0500, Sahil Tandon wrote:
> Also consider rejecting machines that HELO (or EHLO) with "dynamic
> looking" hostnames.
As well as your own IP, hostname and domain(s). No-one shoud use those
as their HELO, but some (stupid) spammers do (hoping to get whitelisted
The zen list is the only RBL I use. And SpamAssassin works very well.
--
Sent from my iTouch
On Dec 7, 2008, at 6:38, Tolga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I am tired of spam. I installed spamassassin but doesn't help. So, can
you send me an effective RBL list please?
Regards,
mto
Won't that still break thunderbird? Or did mozilla finally fix that?
--
Sent from my iTouch
On Dec 7, 2008, at 14:41, Geert Hendrickx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As well as your own IP, hostname and domain(s).
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 04:24:48PM -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> Won't that still break thunderbird? Or did mozilla finally fix that?
It won't. And please stop top-posting.
--
Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The iPhone and itouch are maniacal about forcing top posting.
--
Sent from my iTouch
On Dec 7, 2008, at 16:30, Sahil Tandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 04:24:48PM -0700, LuKreme wrote:
Won't that still break thunderbird? Or did mozilla finally fix that?
It won't. An
d. I'd appreciate any hints, leads or tips. Thanks!
- Mark
"Too much sanity may be madness! But maddest of all - -to see life as it is and
not as it should be."
__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3669 (20081207) __
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
http://www.eset.com
LuKreme a écrit :
> Won't that still break thunderbird? Or did mozilla finally fix that?
>
AFAICT, Thunderbird now uses a literal IP. but there may be MUAs that
use the sender domain. and anyway, many MUAs will use arbitrary names
(netbios names, ...).
but MUAs connect to a submission server, wh
Mark A. Olbert a écrit :
> I recently installed Exchange as my mail server, with postfix on a linux box
> serving as an anti-spam front end. This works great for all my regular mail.
>
> However, I'm having trouble figuring out how to integrate mailman into the
> setup. Previously, when mail del
In looking for methods to install DKIM with postfix I am running into
some old info and some new info. It looks like the best way to handle
DKIM is using the plugin feature of postfix and use the sendmail
milters.
The other question is what do most people do with the check on the
DKIM if
t;mailman" transport in master.cf.
something like
mailman unix - n n - - pipe
flags=FR user=mailman:mailman
argv=/usr/local/bin/mailman_wrapper.sh
${user} ${extension}
and use transport_maps:
lists.arcabama.com mailman:
Magnus Bäck wrote:
On Sunday, December 07, 2008 at 18:30 CET,
Terry Carmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Reinaldo de Carvalho wrote:
smtpd_client_restrictions =
permit_mynetworks,
permit_sasl_authenticated,
reject_unauth_destination,
hash:/etc/postfix/whitelist,
Mark A. Olbert a écrit :
> That almost makes sense, even in my ignorant state. Please bear with me.
>
> I'm pretty sure I've overridden local because I use maia mailguard, which
> re-injects email into the mail processing queue after running it through
> amavisd/spamassassin. Here are the additi
LuKreme a écrit :
> In looking for methods to install DKIM with postfix I am running into
> some old info and some new info. It looks like the best way to handle
> DKIM is using the plugin feature of postfix and use the sendmail milters.
>
if you use amavisd-new, then it supports DKIM (assuming
On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 02:01:05AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> > The other question is what do most people do with the check on the DKIM
> > if a message fails, reject outright? Won't this mess up any forwarded
> > mail?
> >
>
> I wouldn't reject. I actually leave verification to spamassassin.
It wo
onf -n'. (you can "hide" private infos if
you want, but do so coherently).
the domain (lists.arcabama.com) must be listed in one of the available
classes. as I said before, simply put it in mydestination and everything
should be fine (you don't need to add a transport entry).
_
ine a "mailman" transport in master.cf.
something like
mailman unix - n n - - pipe
flags=FR user=mailman:mailman
argv=/usr/local/bin/mailman_wrapper.sh
${user} ${extension}
and use transport_maps:
lists.arcabama.com mailman:
On 7-Dec-2008, at 18:50, Victor Duchovni wrote:
Do NOT use DKIM to reject unsigned mail or mail with a broken
signature.
If you don't intend to whitelist any DKIM senders, don't both
validating
DKIM signatuers, there is little point in doing so.
My main intent is to try to flag mails claim
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 08:14:17PM -0700, LuKreme wrote:
> My main intent is to try to flag mails claiming to be from paypal that
> aren't, so I think maybe just DKIM support in SpamAssassin is the way
> to go.
http://archives.neohapsis.com/archives/postfix/2007-11/0495.html
--
Vikt
Hello,
I have a working Postfix 2.5.5 setup that uses several rbls. I would
like to collect the mail being blocked by these rbls but have it all
delivered to a single local address. I already have local delivery
working fine. Is this possible in an simple fashion?
Ideally I would be able to rew
On Dec 7, 2008, at 5:45 PM, LuKreme wrote:
The iPhone and itouch are maniacal about forcing top posting.
File a bug report with Apple. If they get enough requests, something
might get done about it.
http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter/bugrptform.html
On Monday, December 08, 2008 at 06:36 CET,
Frederick Reeve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a working Postfix 2.5.5 setup that uses several rbls. I would
> like to collect the mail being blocked by these rbls but have it all
> delivered to a single local address. I already have local del
LuKreme wrote:
[...]
The other question is what do most people do with the check on the DKIM
if a message fails, reject outright? Won't this mess up any forwarded
mail?
Because of DKIM and related specifications are in a time of transition
stage, it is not good to reject directly if a messag
Mark A. Olbert a écrit :
> Sorry about the line endings. Let me try again:
>
> Error message:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/etc/postfix# mailq
> -Queue ID- --Size-- Arrival Time -Sender/Recipient---
> 140DC2741FE 459 Sun Dec 7 17:57:07 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (host 127.0.0.1[127.0.0.1] sa
45 matches
Mail list logo
