Re: [SAtalk] New spammer technique

Pierre Bacquet wrote: Hello fellow spam fighters, SA version? S*ll* *d**t Antoine -- Tony Earnshaw Humor him and he'll go away http://j-walk.com/blog/docs/conference.htm http://www.billy.demon.nl Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- This SF.Net emai

Re[4]: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

Hello Robert, RM> Ah, but you see, I didn't test your message -- I tested an identical RM> message that reached me here directly from the spammer RM> The email I received here was both text and html. The HTML was RM> effectively empty -- it had the following tags: html, head, title, /title RM> (n

Re: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 08:15:59AM -0500, Thomas Cameron wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 7:47 AM > Subject: OT: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin > > > > What I dont understand is why you guys dont just pass html

Re[2]: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

Hello Robert, Wednesday, July 2, 2003, 6:16:03 PM, you wrote: AM>> This spam had a 0 score, SA 2.54... wondering how it got AM>> through - it is full of lots of words about weight loss and AM>> all caps words like GUARANTEED, FREE - no HTML though, just AM>> plain text: RM> It scored 6.2 here, >

Re: [SAtalk] http://news.spamassassin.org/ down

On Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 06:08:18AM +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: > http://news.spamassassin.org/ has like been down for 2 days, or is it just me? It's up now. The server had to move on VERY short notice and was between colos for a few days. I posted a note to SA-Talk as soon as I knew a few days ago

On-line again. (Re: [SAtalk] news.spamassassin.org downtime)

On Fri, Jun 27, 2003 at 10:24:35AM -0700, Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > SA folks, > > The server that hosts news.spamassassin.org will be moving on very short > notice. It'll be shut down around 9pm Pacific time on Saturday. That > machine will be reloacted to south San Jose probably on Monday evening

[SAtalk] Local.cf

Hi folks, I've problem with spamassassin 2.5x and local.cf on OpenBSD 3.3. I would see X-Spam-Report in the headers, but I can't. Report_header 1 doesn't work. Why? How could I see that? Another question: how could I filter spam with "

Re: [SAtalk] Martijn/Martin/Marten Beverlander

Simon Byrnand writes: > At 17:18 2/07/03 -0700, Justin Mason wrote: > > >Daniel Quinlan writes: > > > I haven't read/heard the BBC Beverlander story. Any problems there are > > > probably mostly ignorance. > > > >no problems -- it's a great investigation, following 1 spam to its > >(probable) so

Re[3]: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

Hello Abigail, Wednesday, July 2, 2003, 6:49:53 PM, you wrote: AM> The email that I posted was text only - it came to me in AM> that form, I posted full headers including: AM> Content-Type: text/plain AM> So there shouldn't be any HTML scoring at all - if there AM> were any HTML tags in the sa

Re: [SAtalk] Martijn/Martin/Marten Beverlander

At 17:18 2/07/03 -0700, Justin Mason wrote: Daniel Quinlan writes: > I haven't read/heard the BBC Beverlander story. Any problems there are > probably mostly ignorance. no problems -- it's a great investigation, following 1 spam to its (probable) source. and what a twisty, turny way it takes to

Re: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Abigail, Tuesday, July 1, 2003, 9:51:24 PM, you wrote: AM> This spam had a 0 score, SA 2.54... wondering how it got AM> through - it is full of lots of words about weight loss and AM> all caps words like GUARANTEED, FREE - no HTML though, just

Re: OT: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

"Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What I dont understand is why you guys dont just pass html messages > thru the rendering core of Mozilla and extract the text as the > viewer would see. This would eliminate all the attempts to obscure > the message. And any message with screwed up text after

Re: [SAtalk] http://news.spamassassin.org/ down

Wednesday, July 2, 2003, 11:06:28 PM, Dan wrote: > http://news.spamassassin.org/ has like been down for 2 days, or is it just me? mysql://spamassassin:@localhost/spamassassin_news failed to connectCan't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock' (2) Looks like s

Re: [SAtalk] Bug in whitelist_from?

At 14:41 1/07/03 +0100, Adam T. Bowen wrote: > >and it is getting a USER_IN_WHITELIST -100 score. The whitelist rule > >causing this is: > > > >whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > whitelist_from looks at several other headers, not just the literal From: > header > > In particular, I bet '"Sender"

Re: [SAtalk] Martijn/Martin/Marten Beverlander

Daniel Quinlan writes: > I haven't read/heard the BBC Beverlander story. Any problems there are > probably mostly ignorance. no problems -- it's a great investigation, following 1 spam to its (probable) source. and what a twisty, turny way it takes to get there! --j.

[SAtalk] http://news.spamassassin.org/ down

http://news.spamassassin.org/ has like been down for 2 days, or is it just me? P.S.This test describe RCVD_IN_RFCI Received via a relay in ipwhois.rfc-ignorant.org causes the curious user to try to go to an non existent website. even rfc-ignorant.org doesn't exist. Or is it just me? -

[SAtalk] http://news.spamassassin.org/ down

http://news.spamassassin.org/ has like been down for 2 days, or is it just me? --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter

Re[2]: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

Hello Ross, Wednesday, July 2, 2003, 8:26:43 AM, you wrote: RV> On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 09:51:24PM -0700, Abigail Marshall wrote: >> Subject: Why are so many people losing weight on Atkins? >> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 >> tests=none >> version=2.54 >> X-Spam-Level:

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Jim Ford wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:31:30PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > > > no "extra". There is no difference in text/plain or HTML text advertising, so > > why should one try to to match in mixed text and markup? I think this has also > > been discussed here some we

Re: [SAtalk] Martijn/Martin/Marten Beverlander

Tony Earnshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [1] For those who don't know, the BBC is the "British Broadcasting > Corporation." An independently funded broadcaster, though nevertheless > belonging to the British Autocracy. Known as a champion of truth, the > BBC is currently fighting to prove su

Re: [SAtalk] Two new techniques or old hat?

Kelson Vibber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "adivvy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> 1. Considered spam by SA but subject not altered because of two 'subject:' >> fields: > > This one's new to me, and sounds like it would be an excellent indicator of > spam. (Are two subject headers even allowed?

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

Jim Ford writes: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:31:30PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > > > no "extra". There is no difference in text/plain or HTML text advertising, so > > why should one try to to match in mixed text and markup? I think this has also > > been discussed here some weeks ago. Don't r

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Jim Ford wrote: > If spam with eg 'penis enlargement' is > slipping through as has previously been mentioned No, spam in that format is not what has previously been mentioned. The format that has been mentioned is pengarbageis which I speculate SA is translating to "pengar

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:31:30PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > no "extra". There is no difference in text/plain or HTML text advertising, so > why should one try to to match in mixed text and markup? I think this has also > been discussed here some weeks ago. Don't remember the outcome or if it

Re: [SAtalk] Two new techniques or old hat?

Kelson Vibber wrote: > This one's old hat. A significant percentage of spammers will > deliberately send to the secondary MX on the chance that it will be > less protected than the primary. Worse, a few will send directly to an A record- or to a system which used to be the MX, but which is not a

Re: [SAtalk] Metrics / Statistics question

Hannu Liljemark writes: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:03:00PM +0300, Robert A Nesius wrote: > > > Do you know why spamd doesn't have it's own metric-tracking > > code built in? It seems like such an obvious thing to have > > spamd do on it's own so you could just ask it for reports. > > Beats me

Re: [SAtalk] spamassassin WEB interface

Hi, There are some on Freshmeat and I have one at StandAlone - http://mail.limelyte.net/downloads/standalone.tgz Squirell Plugin - http://mail.limelyte.net/downloads/squirrel-plugin.tgz Regards, Rick Jose M.Herrera wrote: Where I can found spamassassin in web interface??... I read once in th

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

(Is this still "OT"?) On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > > The only way to extract the text as the viewer would see it is to use > > the renderer of the viewer's mail client [impossible, given that SA > > generally runs before the message is even delivered] > > Well, I think one can do th

Re: [SAtalk] Hormel sues

-- Bob Apthorpe On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Alan Leghart wrote: > --On Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:28 PM -0400 Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> "MSS" == Malte S Stretz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > MSS> But I always thought you get a trademark always only for some > > MSS> "cla

Re: [SAtalk] Metrics / Statistics question

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 11:03:00PM +0300, Robert A Nesius wrote: > Do you know why spamd doesn't have it's own metric-tracking > code built in? It seems like such an obvious thing to have > spamd do on it's own so you could just ask it for reports. Beats me... spamd logs to syslog with all the n

[SAtalk] Martijn/Martin/Marten Beverlander

Anybody hear the BBC[1] 4 broadcast about the above s*it on Wednesday July 1 18:00 CEST ? He's Dutch. (I'm not, but normally love them for their honesty and lack of chagrin. Moreover, I live and work amongst them, speak their lingo with exams, every day experience and all.) Beverlander was sla

Re: [SAtalk] 2.60 and Base 64 enc text?

Chris Santerre wrote: How does 2.60 deal with the embedded base 64 encoded text trick? Try it? Tony P.s. I'm still not getting *any* spam at all, with Postfix 2.0.12 and Amavis daemon. That is to say, I'm getting them alright, but ** Kayijaaa, smack , right into the amavisd.new ce

[SAtalk] spamassassin WEB interface

Where I can found spamassassin in web interface??... I read once in this list that exist a spamassassin in web interface??. Where I can found! Bye! --- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

Jim Ford wrote on Wed, 2 Jul 2003 20:02:18 +0100: > > 1. just ignore all extra markup or seemingly markup, so that you just get > > the text > > It'd be easy enough to strip out nonsense like , wouldn't it? > Think so. I just notice that my wording was somewhat ambiguous, I wanted to say: > j

[SAtalk] Re: GA Submission

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 05:02:24PM -0300, Tim Cruikshank wrote: > "head ham.log | grep CORPORA_SUBMIT_VERSION_2_6_0_CHECK1_1" > there is nothing found. The phrase "CORPORA_SUBMIT_VERSION_2_6_0_CHECK1_1" > does not appear anywhere in the ham.log or the spam.log. Hi. Thought I'd respond to everyone

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn and premunged reports

Yuval Kojman wrote on Wed, 2 Jul 2003 22:01:08 +0300 (IDT): > How well does sa-learn know to chew report safe munged spams? > It uses the full message, not just the attachment. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com IE-Center

Re: [SAtalk] MAPS RBL+ problem

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > How does SA (spamd) querry the RBL's? > Is looks like it uses the local systems resolve settings. > The other RBL's work, but MAPS checkes the connecting IP. > It also looks like i checks xx.in-addr.arpa and not > rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org. > > "dig @eur

[SAtalk] Whitlisted but not

The attached message got white listed but the listed from address is not in the global config file and we do not allow user configs. Thanks. -- * John McCoy, Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] Central Systems Administrator Central Systems, Mills College Oakland, CA 94613 Ph

[SAtalk] Why are local users getting marked as spam?

I'm using Postfix 1.x and SpamAssassin 2.54. Because of Postfix's configuration, both incoming and outgoing messages get scanned by spamd. I have my domain (ezabel.com) Whitelisted in local.cf: whitelist_from @ezabel.com But, some of my users who use nonstandard email clients (Eudora for Palm s

[SAtalk] sa-learn and premunged reports

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I'm a bit appalled by the crypticism of the Mail::SpamAssassin module tree, and have yet to figure this one out... How well does sa-learn know to chew report safe munged spams? i'm hoping it learns the attached part, because i want it to learn on a ni

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 07:31:30PM +0200, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > 1. just ignore all extra markup or seemingly markup, so that you just get > the text It'd be easy enough to strip out nonsense like , wouldn't it? I would have thought it could be done by sed in .procmailrc. If spam using such measu

[SAtalk] Qmail-scanner and SA, scanning question

Hey all,   I would like to be able to Use Qmail Scanner and SA to tag spam and then be able to filter mail based on the X-Spam Level – not just whether it’s spam or not but actually by the hit points. Thus some mail (say between 5.0 and 8.0 hits) still goes to the normal inbox and tagged

Re: [SAtalk] Hormel sues

--On Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:28 PM -0400 Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "MSS" == Malte S Stretz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MSS> But I always thought you get a trademark always only for some MSS> "class" of product. So Hormel is definitely in the food business MSS> while the SpamArrest

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn question...

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 01:22:14PM -0400, Wendell Smith wrote: > I appreciate the help but um... you didn't really answer my > question > So is it bad to push one piece of mail though sa-learn or not? I can't see anything wrong with it - there's a --single option (see sa-learn --h

Re: [SAtalk] Hormel sues

> "MSS" == Malte S Stretz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MSS> But I always thought you get a trademark always only for some MSS> "class" of product. So Hormel is definitely in the food business MSS> while the SpamArrest guys tried to get a trademark as an ISP and MSS> software vendor. Think "Cok

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn question...

You're misinterpreting the man page: "Another thing to be aware of, is that typically you should aim to train with at least 1000 messages of spam, and 1000 ham messages, if possible. More is better, but anything over about 5000 messages does not improve accuracy significantly in our tests." T

Re: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

- Original Message - From: "Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 7:47 AM Subject: OT: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin > What I dont understand is why you guys dont just pass html messages thru the > rendering core of Mozilla and ext

Re: OT: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

Bart Schaefer wrote on Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:55:34 -0700 (PDT): > Possibly because Mozilla isn't written in Perl? > > Possibly because SA already has its own HTML renderer through which the > messages are passed? And possibly because Mozilla libaries are not necessarily installed on mail machines?

Re: [SAtalk] sa-learn question...

I appreciate the help but um... you didn't really answer my question reread please... I read in the FAQ that if SA makes an error in judgment with respect to its bayes filter that I can use sa-learn to correct this I have also read that it is best to only do this with around 1000 pieces of

[SAtalk] MAPS RBL+ problem

How does SA (spamd) querry the RBL's? Is looks like it uses the local systems resolve settings. The other RBL's work, but MAPS checkes the connecting IP. It also looks like i checks xx.in-addr.arpa and not rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org. "dig @europe1.mail-abuse.org xxx.xxx.xxx.rbl-plus.mail-abuse.org" o

[SAtalk] Virtual users + SQL

I'm having some problems with getting SQL configs to work with virtual users. My setup is such that we're primarily spam scanning at a domain not a user level thus the usernames are the domainname of the recipient. We've been running a locally patched version until recently (though I see the --vi

Re: OT: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Bill wrote: > What I dont understand is why you guys dont just pass html messages thru > the rendering core of Mozilla Possibly because Mozilla isn't written in Perl? Possibly because SA already has its own HTML renderer through which the messages are passed? > and extract t

Re: [SAtalk] Hormel sues

Hmmm... from [1]: | They are opposing an attempt to trademark a name containing their | registered trademark. Considering the typically litigious nature of other | companies and Hormel's relative tolerance of the use of the generic term | "spam", I hardly think they should be cast as the bad guy fo

[SAtalk] ANN: SpamPD v.2 released

Hello, A quick note to let anyone interested know that I've released a new version of the spampd script (not to be confused with spamd). There's a few new features, but the main improvement is in terms of reliability. The script no longer takes any responsibility for the mail, acting as a tra

[SAtalk] Here's a good one SpamAssassin cought (Was: OPEN ME)

Usually glancing through the preview is a good indication of a spam or false positive. I love this one in the HTML code, telling me my order will be shipped, although... well it's somewhat backordered... To say the least! Evan This mail is probably spam. The original message has been attached al

[SAtalk] (no report template found)

Maybe someone can tell me what I've done wrong. I've just moved to a new HP-UX system, and copied all my files from one system to the other. Nowwhen I get a SPAM, the body of my email just has this line: (no report template found) The orig. email is still attached to it, but the report

Re: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 09:51:24PM -0700, Abigail Marshall wrote: > Subject: Why are so many people losing weight on Atkins? > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=4.0 > tests=none > version=2.54 > X-Spam-Level: > X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54 (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp

[SAtalk] Hormel sues

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55892-2003Jul1.html http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/135144116_spamhormel02.html http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/07/02/1453254.shtml?tid=111&tid=126 --- This SF.Net email spon

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 05:29:46PM +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: > I get your point of view, but why didn't you put > the rule name at the end of former line in parenthesis. > And everyone would be satisfied :-)) There's already a bugzilla ticket open about this. I think just putting the

RE: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

On 02 July 2003 14:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:21:21AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: >> I've always considered the "no rule names report format" a "duh" >> feature of SA, so I for one am glad for the change. > > I get your point of view, but

[SAtalk] 2.60 and Base 64 enc text?

How does 2.60 deal with the embedded base 64 encoded text trick? I up'd the score overnight to see what would happen and hit a ton of FPs. I'm still using 2.43, but you all knew that already :)   Does it look for the double embedded entry? I'm tagging everything but these pains, because the

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 09:21:21AM -0400, Matt Kettler wrote: > I've always considered the "no rule names report format" a "duh" feature of > SA, so I for one am glad for the change. I get your point of view, but why didn't you put the rule name at the end of former line in parenthesis. An

Re: [SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

At 11:42 AM 7/2/03 +0400, Andrew A. Vasilyev wrote: One can see which is more reader-friendly :-)) True, but I'd argue the old format is useless, regardless of readability. It doesn't list the names of the rules, just the descriptions, making the information it provides very limited in value. (

OT: RE: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin > > > On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:42:00AM +0300, Jan Elmqvist Nielsen wrote: > >> How did this mail only get 1.3 by spamassassin? >> >> I am using mailscanner 4.21-9 and spamassassin 2.55 > > Are you letting MailSca

Re: [SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:42:00AM +0300, Jan Elmqvist Nielsen wrote: > How did this mail only get 1.3 by spamassassin? > > I am using mailscanner 4.21-9 and spamassassin 2.55 Are you letting MailScanner do DNSBL/RBL lookups or SpamAssasssin? Here with spamc/spamd 2.55 via postfix the mail scor

Re: [SAtalk] Why did this spam go through?

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 07:51:00AM +0300, Abigail Marshall wrote: > This spam had a 0 score, SA 2.54... wondering how it got > through - it is full of lots of words about weight loss and > all caps words like GUARANTEED, FREE - no HTML though, just > plain text: Sneaky spam. Start using bayes or

[SAtalk] Procmail+Spamassassin on global domain basis

Hi, OS: Redhat Linux 9.0 KERNEL: 2.4.20-smp MTA:Exim 3.36 SPAM: SpamAssassin 2.55 PROCMAIL: Procmail 3.22 HOW OUR MAIL WORKS -- USERS: 4000 DOMAINS:160 Each users mail resides in /var/spool/mail/$LOGNAME I have se

Re: [SAtalk] spamd "simply replaces" spamassassin? d on't think so

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 05:16:00PM +0300, Iago wrote: > I'm running perl 5.8, spamassassin 2.55, solaris 2.7, > postfix 2.something (latest stable). perl 5.6.1, SA 2.55, Sol8, postfix 2.something here. > Some guidance as to how to 'simply' replace a phantom > program that runs, but is ne

Re: [SAtalk] Metrics / Statistics question

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 04:23:00AM +0300, Robert A Nesius wrote: > I scanned the list archives and came across a few links, but > no good directions. Could someone please point me in the right > direction? My spamd is running on the mail server, not a > separate host. http://www.gryzor.com/tool

[SAtalk] _REPORT_ format

Hi! Could the developers be so kind to explain the reason for changing the _REPORT_ template output format? Old: X-Spam-Report: -17.3 points, 5.0 required; * 1.0 -- From: does not include a real name * 0.4 -- BODY: HTML is missing "table" close tags * 0.3 -- BO

[SAtalk] Only 1.3 score by spamassassin

How did this mail only get 1.3 by spamassassin? I am using mailscanner 4.21-9 and spamassassin 2.55 I can see that: Expand Your Penis up to 20% Thicker is in html this: Expand Your Pen5t669is up to 20% Thicker Jan Elmqvist Nielsen --- Begin Message --- NEVER AGAIN BE EMBARRASSED ABOUT YOUR

Re: [SAtalk] How could I know that Spamassassin is working in my system?

- Original Message - From: "lanceeck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Puth Chan Choth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ralf Guenthner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] How could I know that Spamassassin is working in my system? > Chan,

Re: [SAtalk] Running spamd supervised?

Original Message - From: "Dallas L. Engelken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ralf Guenthner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 7:47 PM Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Running spamd supervised? >drop the -d, you dont want it to fork off or supervise cant control it. >

[SAtalk] Couple more links

Title: Message http://www.niedermayer.ca/papers/bayesian/index.html   and   http://archive.newscientist.com/secure/article/article.jsp?rp=1&id=mg17824013.600   (free 7-day trial subscription required)

[SAtalk] New spammer technique

Hello fellow spam fighters, I don't know if it has already been signalled, but this is a trick I have seen in one SPAM that I've got : We were aware of one technique which is beaking some words (well known by filters) using HTML comments. I've found such technique that uses a different trick : P