Duncan Findlay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-12-12 23:57:48 -0500]:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 09:56:23PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
> > If you really want people to reply on-list your should add a Reply-To
> > header that contains [EMAIL PROTECTED] to your
> > outbound messages. Note this is not "Rep
--On Thursday, December 12, 2002 3:07 PM -0500 Tom Allison
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| My question is if anyone knows anything about running
| spamassassin/spamc/spamd under sieve.
Sure, sort of. Though, I'm using amavisd-new[1] with postfix[2]. It's not
that it runs "under sieve", you simpl
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 09:56:23PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
> This is also getting WAY OT.. but does pertain to email still :)
Multiple copies of the same message are kinda like spam :-)
> If you really want people to reply on-list your should add a Reply-To
> header that contains [EMAIL PROT
Razor is notorious for having some quantity of invalid submissions.. Not
too many, but some... (note: I'm excluding the null-mime-block issue from
this, since that's now fixed). Usually bad submitters get bad CF ratings,
but it takes a while before they are ignored completely...This means
there
(I'm manually removing you from the reply path and replying only to list,
per your stated preference, even though your email headers are drafted in a
manner which does not request such handling)
This is also getting WAY OT.. but does pertain to email still :)
Note that I didn't say I'm in the r
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 07:32:07PM -0500, Matt Kettler wrote:
> This also means that direct-to-me copies of messages wind up left in my
> inbox, regardless of wether or not it's also sent to the list. Something I
> find handy for tracking direct replies to messages I sent. (yes, I really
> do wa
Entertaining. The majordomo result from my re-subscription to the Postfix
mailing list was flagged - and listed in Razor.
How'd it get into Razor?
-- Forwarded message --
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Original-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: fr
I've never seen a message that went through the list (ie: X-BeenThere:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] appears), that did not have a
[SAtalk] in the subject. My current SATalk archive goes back to 10/01/02.
The behavior you see happens when someone replies, removes the SATalk
subject tag, and replies to you
- Original Message -
From: "Jonathan Nichols" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Upgrade
> >
> > How easy is it to upgrade from 2.01 to 2.43? Do I need to make
> > substantial config-c
Hi,
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 12:00:44PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
> > Basically, if you do any quantity of bulk mail, some (possibly
> > significant) subset of the world will consider you to be a spammer no
> > matter what you do, unless you're 100% *c
At 01:45 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote:
If you reply to a message, and remove the [SA] header, it won't add it.
Like see above, you typed [SA] in, but I removed it, so it's not there.
Make sense?? ;)
I feel stupid now.. I guess not. I've seen a few messages without the
[SAtalk] So... how come p
> -Original Message-
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 3:16 PM
> To: McClung, Darren W.
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: OT: No [SATalk] tag? (was: sql support)
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:57:03PM -0600, McClung, Darren W. wr
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 12:00:44PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
> TVD> - Include clear information about why the person is receiving the
> TVD>newsletter and how to change their preferences.
>
> SA will flag some of these as "excuses". Many people will disbelieve
> them anyway.
Yeah, I figure
I'm going to pretend that I did not forget to restart spamd
Thanks . =]
--
Chris LaFrance
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Is sloppiness in speech caused by ignorance or apathy?
I don't know and I don't care."
-- William Safire
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12,
> -Original Message-
> From: McClung, Darren W. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 2:57 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: OT: No [SATalk] tag? (was: sql support)
>
>
> Why wasn't this message tagged with [SATalk], and, therefore,
> didn't get
> filtered?
>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 04:29:21PM -0500, Chris LaFrance wrote:
> I've tried applying this to the local.cf file and html still seems to be
> "broken" upon arrival.
If you're running spamd, did you restart the daemon?
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV.
msg11
If you reply to a message, and remove the [SA] header, it won't add it.
Like see above, you typed [SA] in, but I removed it, so it's not there.
Make sense?? ;)
At 12:57 PM 12/12/2002, you wrote:
Why wasn't this message tagged with [SATalk], and, therefore, didn't get
filtered?
Darren
Evan Pl
>From a recent post
> > Second questionhtml files seem to be corrupted if they are tagged as
> > spam...how can I correct this.
>
> http://spamassassin.taint.org/faq/index.cgi?req=show&file=faq01.006.htp
I've tried applying this to the local.cf file and html still seems to be
"broken" up
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:57:03PM -0600, McClung, Darren W. wrote:
> Why wasn't this message tagged with [SATalk], and, therefore, didn't get
> filtered?
It was for me:
Subject: [SAtalk] sql support
I filter on envelope from to avoid this kind of stuff. :)
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"To h
Why wasn't this message tagged with [SATalk], and, therefore, didn't get
filtered?
Darren
-Original Message-
From: Dallas Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 13:32
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: sql support
when using the -q flag, are there any options
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 12:00:44PM -0500, Vivek Khera wrote:
> Basically, if you do any quantity of bulk mail, some (possibly
> significant) subset of the world will consider you to be a spammer no
> matter what you do, unless you're 100% *confirmed* opt-in with all
> records to prove it.
Exactly
I've been using SpamAssassin in procmail rules for a while with
little/no problems.
I just found out about something called sieve, it's a filtering
language that works with cyrus (an IMAP server).
My question is if anyone knows anything about running
spamassassin/spamc/spamd under sieve.
--
N
when using the -q flag, are there any options besides the ones listed
below that you can use? or is there plans to added additional support?
* whitelist_from
* blacklist_from
* required_hits
* rewrite_subject
* report_header
* defang_mime
* terse_report
like ?
whitelist_from_rcvd
unwhitelist_fro
> The question is: What can non-spam bulk mailers do to show that they're
> acting responsibly/help avoid being called spammers?
The huge, number one, red flag, must-have thing is content. Make your
bulk mailings worth the time it takes to read them.
I can't tell you how many builk mailing lists
Hello,
I have two questions:
1) If a legitimate email is marked as spam, I want
Spam Assassin to return an email to the sender stating
that the email was marked as spam. We want to do this
inititally so we can whitelist anyone who complains.
2) Also, I can I copy the 60_whitelist.cf file to
/etc
> "TVD" == Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TVD> really spam", I'm satisfied that it's not). However, the newsletters
TVD> sometimes get trapped by anti-spam tools, and some users (for various
TVD> reasons) like to report the messages as spam. The standard bulk email
TVD> set of i
Any fairly recent version of PHP should suffice. It doesn't use
register globals
or any options that need to be specifically compiled in.
For my authentication, I use a suid perl script that authenticates
against NIS maps
and returns the user directory among some other auth info. If you're
goin
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 12:42:26PM -0800, Kurt Andersen wrote:
> Seen this blurb from today? I can't quite figure out
> how I feel about it.
> > 3. SiteSell e-mails you back a point-by-point rating,
> > derived from the widely used filter called Spam
> > Assassin, showing how "spammy" your text i
Good afternoon
Please assist if possible.
I have set up a basic exim MTA on RedHat 8
However, I cannot get SA to work at all.
I have read the docs but still get in a twist.
Sorry to bother everyone.
Regards,
Tom
Newbie
---
This sf.net
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 the voices made Justin Mason write:
> (a) it lets legit publishers avoid relatively-obvious trouble areas
> (like talking about spam laws etc.)
Like everyone already could do, but only spammers bothered to do.
> (b) it lures spammers into a false sense of security, as
Justin Mason said the following on 11/12/02 23:08:
Kurt Andersen said:
Seen this blurb from today? I can't quite figure out
how I feel about it.
yeah, me too. Both are SpamAssassin btw.
IMO, it's overall a good thing as
(a) it lets legit publishers avoid relatively-obvious trouble areas
31 matches
Mail list logo
