On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 12:00:41PM -0500, Ed Weinberg wrote:
> I am surprised that email that just has html with no text does not score
> higher. From '85 to 2002 I used an email client (Forte Agent) which did
> not render HTML. I make the generalization that any email, with the
> exception of n
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 04:03:23PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Check this message (scroll down until you see tag!)
The copy of this spam that I got scored 7.7 against my filters.
X-Spam-Status: Yes, hits=7.7 required=5.0
tests=CTYPE_JUST_HTML,HTML_PRE,MAILTO_LINK,ONE_PIXEL_IMG,
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 12:06:13PM -0500, Rose, Bobby wrote:
> I wish we could get more info from Justin or Craig to clear up
> everything. Justin's last message did raise some concern with the
> remark of "There's no closing of the source involved (except for their
> own (Deersoft now NAI) propr
So this spam just sneaked into my inbox with 4.9 points. I hate that, it's
the first one in days.
Looking at it, it turns out that a bunch of bogus Received headers are
fooling Spamassassin into quitting with the DNSBL checks before it gets to
the real meat -- increasing num_check_received to 5 r
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 02:58:09PM -0600, Rich Puhek wrote:
> I found that I can't outright block .cn and .kr without some customers
> getting very irritated at me. Even if I could, maintaining a whitelist
> would be a PITA for entire countries (or, worse, for RBLS like
> unconfirmed.ordb.org.)
On Sat, Dec 28, 2002 at 02:18:09PM -0600, Mike Loiterman wrote:
> Hrm...I'm wondering if sending the permission denied message is an
> invitation for them to really lay it on me. In other words, they know
> they've hit a valid address, but I'm refusing their crap. Maybe
> they'll use my address
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 11:56:29PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> So in 2.50 now, naming doesn't matter now for meta meta dependencies;
> the code will figure out what order to run the tests in, including
> circular dependencies, and do the right thing. :)
Way cool, thanks.
-Jeremy
--
On Thu, Dec 26, 2002 at 06:27:47PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Ok, I cleaned up the do_meta code a little bit and added in the
> "strategic" sort. :)
I first tried changing the line
my @tests = keys %{$self->{conf}{meta_tests}};
to just sort the keys, but that explodes badly -- you pret
So I'm having some difficulty grasping some stuff about "meta" rules.
Maybe now that I've got >350 lines of local spamassassin config, it's
time for me to delve into the source and join the devel list or
something, but let's see if I can figure this out.
I suspect my problem is related to the ord
On Tue, Dec 24, 2002 at 03:39:44PM -0500, Mike Burger wrote:
> Check the footers...the end of their messages always have "High Speed
> Media" or "HighSpeed Media" in them. And their domains always have
> something like highspeed or hsm or h-s-m.
>
> But, if you're not getting slammed by HSM, c
On Mon, Dec 23, 2002 at 11:41:52PM -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> Well, just so you know ... I took a random sampling from my corpus for
> the hspeed folks...
Which spams are these? I've got tens of thousands and I don't see
anything which sticks out as "high speed media" or whatever...
I do
So I just received an email, and the spamassassin output says:
SPAM: * 0.4 -- RBL: Received via a relay in relays.osirusoft.com
SPAM: [RBL check: found 87.20.89.138.relays.osirusoft.com., type: 127.0.0.3]
SPAM: * 0.6 -- RBL: DNSBL: sender ip address in in a dialup block
SPAM: * 0.4 --
12 matches
Mail list logo
