One way that spammers could try to get around some of the URI rules (at least
for HTML only spam) is to put the main part of the URI into a tag, so
that all of the URIs pulled from won't match rules which
look for domain names and "http://";. I've modified
get_decoded_stripped_body_text_array()
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Matthew Cline wrote:
> The REMOVE_PAGE regexp was
>
> /^https?:\/\/[^\/]+\/remove/
>
> I changed it so that "remove" can be anywhere in the filename, and also
> added "removal", "delete" and "optout" to the words to search for.
I got a spam yesterday that used "no_emai
I've just received two web hosting related spams from "hostingguy" at
bigfoot.com. The "To" had random gibberish added as a host name to actual
domain name:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is this to avoid spam-trap searches that look for exactly the smap trap
adress? They passed b
I've made some changes to a few of the unsub/remove URI rules. A diff for
the changes is included as an attachment...
The UNSUB_PAGE regexp was:
/^https?:\/\/.*(?!cgi).*unsubscribe/i
Using (?!cgi) to exclude URIs with a "cgi" in them doesn't work, because
the first ".*" can match everythin
I'm using spamc from my .procmailrc to talk to a dedicated spamd box.
I'm seeing an intermittent failure of the system, and I thought I'd
ask if others have seen the same thing.
Essentially, there are spams making it through to my mailbox which
don't even have an "X-Spam-Status" header. Yet, I'
On Wednesday 20 March 2002 06:45 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:24PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> > Currenlt, INVALID_MSGID doesn't catch message IDs like
> > <026b10d87e4c$8543d8d6$8ad36ae8@ihervr>, because it only requires that
> > there
>
> But that is a valid Messa
At 16:49 -0800 2002-03-20, Matthew Cline wrote:
>On Wednesday 20 March 2002 12:20 pm, Michael Blakeley wrote:
>> WIth 2.01 installed via CPAN, spamassassin complains about missing
>> Razor::Client - but it is installed:
>>
>> $ perl -MRazor::Client -e 'print "$Razor::Client::VERSION\n";'
>>
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Kerry Nice wrote:
> I did email Chris Prillo of Lockergnome and tried to enlighten him.
> His response basically was that he was mad that people were using
> something that they didn't know how to use and it was too powerful.
Hey, that's a reasonable objection. I would comp
On Wed, 20 Mar 2002, Greg Ward wrote:
> On 20 March 2002, Maurits Bloos said:
>> Has anyone 'hacked' spamproxyd to send *SPAM* to both the intended
>> recipient and to a 'spamtrap' mailbox ?
>
> Why bother? I thought the point of spamproxyd was to allow rejecting
> spam at SMTP-time.
Heck, no.
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 06:09:24PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> Currenlt, INVALID_MSGID doesn't catch message IDs like
> <026b10d87e4c$8543d8d6$8ad36ae8@ihervr>, because it only requires that there
But that is a valid Message-Id according to RFC 2822. Unless you really
want to get into the RFC
Currenlt, INVALID_MSGID doesn't catch message IDs like
<026b10d87e4c$8543d8d6$8ad36ae8@ihervr>, because it only requires that there
be something after the "@". I've changed it so that it requires something like
a normal host name after the "@" (with at least one "." in it). While I was at
it, I
On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 12:24:54AM +0100, Søren Boll Overgaard wrote:
> Using rfc-ignorant.com would be a bad idea.
> In Denmark (where I live) our TLD-administrator is restricted by law from
> running a whois server for .dk. This has earned the entire country a place in
> rfc-ignorant.com's datab
On Wednesday 20 March 2002 12:20 pm, Michael Blakeley wrote:
> WIth 2.01 installed via CPAN, spamassassin complains about missing
> Razor::Client - but it is installed:
>
> $ perl -MRazor::Client -e 'print "$Razor::Client::VERSION\n";'
> 1.20
Downgrade to 1.19
--
Visit http://dmoz.o
> I guess it depends on what the focus is here, do you
> want something that works great for a largely US based
> group with mostly technical email or is there a wider
> goal? Do you go for 100% spam catching with some
> false positives or do you miss some because you never
> want a false positiv
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 03:40:31PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:20:32PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> > Mentioned in one of the article's comments was another RBL that SA currently
> > doesn't use, http://njabl.org/
>
> As well as: http://www.rfc-ignorant.com/
Usin
I did email Chris Prillo of Lockergnome and tried to
enlighten him. His response basically was that he was
mad that people were using something that they didn't
know how to use and it was too powerful. Ok fine, but
I think it is misdirected anger, but I see why he is
mad since his newsletter, wh
>
> On Wednesday 20 March 2002 11:46 am, Lewis Bergman wrote:
> > I have installed SpamAssassin and it is working as it should
> be. The only
> > problem I seem to have is this error is reported when it runs:
> > razor check skipped: No such file or directory undefined Razor::Client
>
> If you are
Im asking this on both lists cause im in desprate need of some help.
For a month or so both my primary email gateway and secondary have been
running fine. Last night out of nowhere it started acting flaky (the
primary) after several hours of fiddling and reinstalling spamassassin and
mailscanner,
Shouldn't this be on the SpamAssassin website... ?
A lot of people seem to have problems with Razor 1.20
> -Original Message-
> From: Matthew Cline [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: woensdag 20 maart 2002 21:17
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Failed t
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:20:32PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> Mentioned in one of the article's comments was another RBL that SA currently
> doesn't use, http://njabl.org/
As well as: http://www.rfc-ignorant.com/
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"I once witnessed a long-winded, month-long fla
On Wednesday 20 March 2002 08:25 am, Jason wrote:
> Looks like ORBZ has been shutdown...
>
> As seen on slashdot
>
> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/20/1528246&mode=thread&tid=111
Mentioned in one of the article's comments was another RBL that SA currently
doesn't use, http://njabl.org
It looks like there are some problems with CPAN 'install
Mail::SpamAssassin' (v2.01) on virgin systems. Apparently 'make test'
looks for some files that aren't there until SpamAssassin has already
been installed:
Running make test
PERL_DL_NONLAZY=1 /usr/bin/perl -Iblib/arch -Iblib/lib
-I/Syst
WIth 2.01 installed via CPAN, spamassassin complains about missing
Razor::Client - but it is installed:
$ perl -MRazor::Client -e 'print "$Razor::Client::VERSION\n";'
1.20
...and the complaint is a little odd:
$ spamassassin -r https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listin
On Wednesday 20 March 2002 11:46 am, Lewis Bergman wrote:
> I have installed SpamAssassin and it is working as it should be. The only
> problem I seem to have is this error is reported when it runs:
> razor check skipped: No such file or directory undefined Razor::Client
If you are using Razor 1.
> Hu... That takes me back a bit. Pine is cool but how do you read HTML
> mail? I don't often need to but it is sorta required.
> I've not looked at Mozilla's client but I used to play with Eudora. The
> problem I've had with everything except OutLook is that they don't scale
> well. Mail boxs
I have installed SpamAssassin and it is working as it should be. The only
problem I seem to have is this error is reported when it runs:
razor check skipped: No such file or directory undefined Razor::Client
The same sort of errror was reported on the make test and it skipped all of
the razor t
I've already forwarded this message to spamassassin-sightings, but I
wanted to suggest a rule that would have caught it:
BODY_PLING: assign messages 0.5 points per exclamation mark per body kB
Granted, some folks do use exclamation marks in legit email. But only
spammers (and other der
If I wish to shut down spamd on a Redhat system without using the
rc script provided (using version 2.11 of SA), is there a proper
signal to send so that e-mail being scanned when the signal hits
don't get lost?
Or would they not even be lost if I sent a sig KILL ?
--
Doug Herr
[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Wed, Mar 20, 2002 at 12:25:47PM -0500, Nick Fisher wrote:
| > > I realy HATE OutLook. In there was annother Win32 mail
| > > client that could cope with the ammount of email I handle I
| > > would move to it.
| >
| > Pine. I switched to pine here at work, and the windows version is quite
| > n
> -Original Message-
> From: Maurits Bloos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 20 March 2002 16:52
> To: 'Greg Ward'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [SAtalk] spamproxyd : 'sending spam to a
> spamtrap box & the
> i ntended recip ient'
>
>
> Well, my server running SA is a mail-gateway (
> SNIP <
> >>I've done some small scale experiments using PerlCtrl (the thing that
> >>allows you to make COM objects from in Perl) to plug into Outlook. Short
> >>and curlies of it is that it works, and it keeps Perl in memory, so
> >>there's no load-time issue. However I'm not entirely sure how
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Ward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: woensdag 20 maart 2002 17:43
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [SAtalk] spamproxyd : 'sending spam to a
> spamtrap box & the
> intended recip ient'
>
>
> On 20 March 2002, Maurits Bloos said:
> > Has any
Nick Fisher wrote:
Good to see that someone is working on this. I expect we'll have some
help from a commercial company too in the next few weeks/months on
assisting with making windows stuff work better here.
>>>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Well thanks... basicly what your saying is th
On 20 March 2002, Maurits Bloos said:
> Has anyone 'hacked' spamproxyd to send *SPAM* to both the intended recipient
> and to a 'spamtrap' mailbox ?
Why bother? I thought the point of spamproxyd was to allow rejecting
spam at SMTP-time. If you're just going to accept it anyways, then use
your r
> >>Good to see that someone is working on this. I expect we'll have some
> >>help from a commercial company too in the next few weeks/months on
> >>assisting with making windows stuff work better here.
> >>
> >HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Well thanks... basicly what your saying is that I
> >should have
Looks like ORBZ has been shutdown...
As seen on slashdot
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/03/20/1528246&mode=thread&tid=111
Jason Portwood
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/li
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:20:19 -0700 (MST)
"Charlie Watts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, sitewide. I'll pay attention - it's only about 2 MB bigger than when
> I mailed yesterday. If it is slowing down (which makes sense), I'll be OK
> for a while. And even if I have to clear it once a month, t
Hi All,
Has anyone 'hacked' spamproxyd to send *SPAM* to both the intended recipient
and to a 'spamtrap' mailbox ?
Currently I hacked spamproxyd to send it to the intended recipient, but it
would help if a copy would go to a spamtrap mailbox where I can see if the
mails are 'really' spam or fals
Hello all!
I've been using razor personally for quite some time now but today I installed
mailscanner site wide which include a hook for spamassassin. Mailscanner and
Spamassassin works but not Razor when called from Spamassassin. I get this
error:
"razor check skipped: Bad file descriptor Insecu
Nick Fisher wrote:
>>Good to see that someone is working on this. I expect we'll have some
>>help from a commercial company too in the next few weeks/months on
>>assisting with making windows stuff work better here.
>>
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Well thanks... basicly what your saying is that I
>shou
40 matches
Mail list logo
