>So I set up IMAPs for my incoming mail, and by using 'localhost' as my
>outbound mail server, I never have to change my config.
>If ISP's started blocking port 25 outbound except to their servers, I
>would then be forced to change my config every time I move my system.
>Only a few clicks, but agg
a cable connection.
I think that was about a half a bucks worth
Best Regards
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Bart Schaefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Spamwriter
| On Wed,
In Reality, a consumer broadband connection is not
the given right to plop any kind of server you want on
the network.
Consumer Broadband connections, be it cable or
dsl are meant for the user to browse faster... that's it
The always on folks (sans a few) are mostly responsible
for the prolifer
"Satya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Default-blocking outbound port 25 is fine, as long as the ISPs don't
| use it as an excuse to insist that I buy a business class line.
You also have got to be kidding...
greg
- Original Message -
From: "Satya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTE
"Mike Batchelor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Why should I have to pay extra for a business-class DSL line just so I can
| avoid using the ISP's heavily clogged relay, when my own mail server can
| deliver my emails directly?
You have got to be kidding
Greg
Thanx Matt
header SUBJECT_ENCODED_MY_TEST Subject:raw =~ /=\?.*\?=/i
catches anything starting with =? and ending with ?= no matter what character set
is embedded.
Regards
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Greg Cirino
anybody have any idea how to catch something like this?
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?B?RmFzdGVzdCBQcmVzY3JpcHRpXm9uIERydSlncyBEZWxpdmVyeSBOYXRpb253aWRl?=
I've tried variations of
header SUBJECT_ENCODED_MY_TEST Subject =~ /=\?.*\?=/
but it just ignores it.
Regards
Greg C
No noticeable decrease in spam here...
did they get the right guys?
g
- Original Message -
From: "Scott Rothgaber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 2:20 PM
Subject: [SAtalk] Virginia Busts Spammers
| http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/internet/12/12
Isn't dynablock off line as of 12/1/3??
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admi
Scott wrote:
| Having a single spam folder is a very bad decision
| I never delete automatically, but the high catagory gets a 10 second
| glance every week, medium gets 20 seconds every week, and low gets 10
| seconds a day. Even when I 'delete', I am archiving it for my own spam
| processing en
Here is a net block of a spammer in training
and had the misfortune (on our network at least)
to hit one of our control addresses (repeatedly)
inetnum: 203.192.162.192 - 203.192.162.255
netname: HAN-SERVER-KR-NETBLK1
country: KR
descr:Hanserver.Net
The following is the text
| What score do you delete at?
We follow a rule of thumb, or middle finger
what is spam to me may not be spam to you
so we don't delete, just tag
g
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Chapman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 4:58 PM
Subject: [S
-tom
> -Original Message-
> http://www.iab.org/Documents/icann-vgrs-response.html
the problem is all the other TLD's that are wildcard(ed) and
hosted on other registrar roots. Not just .com and .net
The .cn .tw (not yet .kr) are also using the same technique
I believe there was a pos
we have turned off the SA rbl checks because
we have noticed it (SA) to be a bit slower.
HTH
G
- Original Message -
From: "Aldo Mari" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "SpamAssassin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Greg Cirino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Fr
I messed up and did not reply all (just a habit)
Actually, if you want to have a black list (rbl) you can
find rbldns (part of the package djbdns) found at
djbdns.com that works very well and is very fast.
Certainly much faster than an Access db, MySql db
et al.
We use it and have complete cont
| > Can I blacklist everyone and setup a whitelist of domains?
black_list_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Earnshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Henry Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "SpamAssassin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 6:40 AM
Subject:
Satya wrote:
|
| >You are already paying a ISP, so, use its services.
| >The ISP should relay your emails for you and queue incoming mail.
|
| Personally, I prefer my ISP to give me an IP connection. A fast
| one, static address highly preferred. That's all.
|
| >Of course not all ISPs offer goo
If you are the one using a database for individual SA settings
the following applies:
If not, Please disregard this email :)
A response to me from Theo:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 04:03:48PM -0400, Greg Cirino wrote:
> My question: Is this functionality going to be part
> of the 2.60 release
| I'm using a DSL line on my email server. Which is part of my ISP's static
| DSL pool. I don't send thru my ISP's mail server. I'm starting to see the
| error in this now. In my mind I had somehow split the difference of HOME DSL
| and BUSINESS DSL. I always agreed that HOME DSL users should alway
bayes is only system wide when using a database
might be implemented in 2.7x
I asked about this when using 2.50
HTH
Regards
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Olivier M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: [SAtalk
| I've been seeing this too, so I added the following rule to my local.cf:
|
| header __TEXT_HTML_BA Content-Type =~ /text\/html/i
| meta NO_BODY_BA __TEXT_HTML_BA && !HTML_MESSAGE
| describe NO_BODY_BA Message with no body
| score NO_BODY_BA 4
|
| It's been working great for me.
we strip text/
5
Regards
Greg
-Original Message-----
From: Greg Cirino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 1:07 PM
To: Robin Lynn Frank; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Jul 9 06:46:55 alpha13 spamd[3206]: identified spam (14.0/5.0) for
>rlfrank:501 in 32.3 seconds, 1836 bytes.
I noticed o
>Jul 9 06:46:55 alpha13 spamd[3206]: identified spam (14.0/5.0) for
>rlfrank:501 in 32.3 seconds, 1836 bytes.
I noticed our server taking 31.0 seconds on my personal SA check
running 2.55
Disabled the rbl checks (we have another package doing this in front
of the mailer) and SA went back down
| had 2 FPs that were obvious as to why. (Still tweaking catching this base64
| junk/)
Isn't base64 what exchange/outlook uses in valid email?
G
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Santerre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Spam Assassin'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday,
Some time back, I believe just after the 2.50 release
I asked if the Bayesian filtering would function
for individual users when using a MySql database.
(currently we are at 2.55)
At that time I was told it was only available site wide
in this configuraion.
My question: Is this functionality goi
we are currently at 2.55 as of today, and it appears to be
functioning well.
we also use a product called MessageWall that is very
effective as a front loader to our mail servers.
We like the ability to throw the monkey wrench into the
mix as the spammers have a bit more to contend with.
What d
| I hate to spoil your day, but it is possible. I had such an experience
| about a year ago. We were using an old version of the popular form mail
| script formail.pl. The version in question had a security issue that
| allowed a spammer to turn my webserver into a mail relay. Because the
|
that's what I thought.
sa has been working great for us
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Martin Radford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Greg Cirino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "mikea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Nix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED
| i.e., everything in that directory is processed, in lexicographical sort
| order.
so this means
local.cf
user_prefs
copy1.c
copy2.x
all would get processed?
Greg
- Original Message -
From: "Nix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "mikea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Spamassassin-List" <[EMAI
Is anybody experiencing rules not firing in the release of 2.50?
They seem to work in the CVS version I downloaded Feb 7
Regards
Greg
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SlickEdit Inc. Develop an edge.
The most comprehensive and flexible c
RESS'
value = '20'
4)
preferences = 'score'
value = ' USERNAME_IN_ADDRESS 20'
It appears the code needs to be changed to allow
this from the sql database. Most logically in the
format of (1) above
It works fine when read from the user_prefs file
Any direction to that code would be
| On Thursday 20 February 2003 17:28 CET Ralph Seichter wrote:
| > Is anybody else receiving dupes from [EMAIL PROTECTED]? I'm
| > currently fiddling with my several of my settings here and I want to make
| > sure it is not my fault...
We are getting them as well
Greg
-
3 + (GMT)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Greg Cirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Your spam has been reported
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 15:28:13 + (GMT)
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=8.2
tests=NO_REAL_NAME
version=2.50-c
Theo wrote:
|Hmmm. The error basically indicates that you have a rule called
|LISTBUILDER which is looking for an eval test, but the eval code
|doesn't exist. Might you have different versions of SA installed?
|The rule came into existence in 2.40, but is back out in 2.50.
I was running 2.50-c
MAIL PROTECTED] is an address that doesn't accept mail.
simple if this is what you really want :)
regards
greg cirino
- Original Message -
From: "Kai Schaetzl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: [
35 matches
Mail list logo
