Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft problems

On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Matt Kettler wrote: > OSIRUSOFT is and has been DEAD. They now match EVERY IP address in the > world in an effort to force everyone to wake up and stop using OSIRUSOFT as > a blacklist. Ah. Excellent. So I need not worry about this. Thanks! - Charles

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft problems

At 12:50 AM 10/14/03 -0400, Charles Gregory wrote: While I think of it, can anyone tell me HOW to actually reach a warm body at 'Osirusoft' and get them to correct the 'blacklisting' of our mail server? It shows up as an open relay, which is something we've never been. I've run several open relay t

[SAtalk] Osirusoft problems

Hallo! While I think of it, can anyone tell me HOW to actually reach a warm body at 'Osirusoft' and get them to correct the 'blacklisting' of our mail server? It shows up as an open relay, which is something we've never been. I've run several open relay tests just to be sure we weren't hacked. In

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

Bob Proulx writes: > I prefer the benevolent dictator approach, where I get to choose and > to ignore the dictators of my choice. Yeah, me too -- a web of trust, basically. If I know that J. Random Listing Guy is publishing a bl, which a public "reviews" site measures as listing 80% of spam with

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 08:43:15PM +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: > Jim Porter wrote: > > > score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 > > score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 > > score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 > > score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 > > score X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE 0 > > score X_OSIRU_SP

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

Porter Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 5:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working? -Original Message- From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 2:38 PM To: Jim Porter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

Understood. I have zero'd the scores accordingly. Thanks for the clarification :) Daz > -Original Message- > From: mikea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 September 2003 14:02 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working? > >

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

> Simon Byrnand wrote: > >> At 20:43 4/09/2003 +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: >> >>> Jim Porter wrote: >>> score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 score X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 01:25:38PM +0100, Darren Coleman wrote: > What's exactly the problem with Osirusoft at the moment then? Have they > actually "blacklisted the entire Internet" (accidentally?) or is that > just an overexaggeration? > > Should I be zero'ing all of their tests? Joe Jared set

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

r [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 05 September 2003 12:08 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working? > > > 1. It *is* the case indeed. Look at your email. Since Osirusoft has > blacklisted the entire internet, every one would have that > test

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

e's something the user is doing that isn't being told here. By now he's probably rebooted his machine in frustration, and it's working fine now. > -Original Message- > From: Ralf G. R. Bergs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

Simon Byrnand wrote: At 20:43 4/09/2003 +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: Jim Porter wrote: score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 score X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE 0 score X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 Fro

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

Jim Porter wrote: score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 score X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE 0 score X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 From what I understood, this would disable rbl checking of osirusoft.com, bu

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

At 20:43 4/09/2003 +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: Jim Porter wrote: score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 score X_OSIRU_SPAMWARE_SITE 0 score X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 From what I understood, th

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

-Original Message- From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 2:38 PM To: Jim Porter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working? At 12:35 PM 9/4/2003 -0400, Jim Porter wrote: >I have added the following lines to my etc/m

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

At 12:35 PM 9/4/2003 -0400, Jim Porter wrote: I have added the following lines to my etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file. >From what I understood, this would disable rbl checking of osirusoft.com, but I am still seeing lines like this in my log file. Do you use spamd? if so, did you restart it?

[SAtalk] osirusoft still working?

Hello, I have added the following lines to my etc/mail/spamassassin/local.cf file. OSIRUSOFT is reported to be down due to DDOS attack 08/27/2003 score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL 0 score X_OSIRU_DUL_FH0 score X_OSIRU_OPEN_RELAY0 score X_OS

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

At 9/3/03 10:11 AM , Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: >Here are the lines to disable the rules. Add these in a file called >/etc/mail/spamassassin/no-osiru.cf. Where does SA know that it is supposed to read this file? I guess you need to either tell SA to read the file or to include the configuration stat

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: The directories /etc/mail/spamassassin and /usr/share/spamassassin are hardcoded into spamassassin as default directories for rule files. [...] or the CONFIGURATION FILES section in: man spamassassin or man Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf Sorry, missed the first one. I didn'

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

At 08:00 PM 9/3/2003 +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: > SA reads any config files in /etc/mail/spamassassin automatically. Sorry, wasn't aware of this, it's not in the manpages (or is it?!). Yes, it is in the manpage for spamassassin. It's not entirely clear, but basically it will find the first "

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

At 07:11 PM 9/3/2003 +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: >Here are the lines to disable the rules. Add these in a file called >/etc/mail/spamassassin/no-osiru.cf. Where does SA know that it is supposed to read this file? I guess you need to either tell SA to read the file or to include the configurat

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

SA Reads all .cf files located in that directory. Frederic Tarasevicius Internet Information Services, Inc. Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: > Martin Radford schrieb: > [...] >>> 4) I am new to spamassassin. What parameter should I use in my >>> configuration to cause spamassassin to stop using osirus

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

> > Martin Radford schrieb: > [...] > >>4) I am new to spamassassin. What parameter should I use in my > >>configuration to cause spamassassin to stop using osirusoft open relay? > > > > See the news article at http://news.spamassassin.org/ > > The instructions given there can't work, IMHO, be

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |cc: | | Subject: Re: [S

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

Patrick Morris schrieb: SA reads any config files in /etc/mail/spamassassin automatically. Sorry, wasn't aware of this, it's not in the manpages (or is it?!). --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://think

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

SA reads any config files in /etc/mail/spamassassin automatically. Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: Martin Radford schrieb: [...] 4) I am new to spamassassin. What parameter should I use in my configuration to cause spamassassin to stop using osirusoft open relay? See the news article at http://news.s

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

On Wed, Sep 03, 2003 at 07:11:34PM +0200, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote: > Martin Radford schrieb: > [...] > >>4) I am new to spamassassin. What parameter should I use in my > >>configuration to cause spamassassin to stop using osirusoft open relay? > > > > See the news article at http://news.spamassas

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

Martin Radford schrieb: [...] 4) I am new to spamassassin. What parameter should I use in my configuration to cause spamassassin to stop using osirusoft open relay? See the news article at http://news.spamassassin.org/ The instructions given there can't work, IMHO, because they're incomplete: >H

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

At Wed Sep 3 17:11:07 2003, Robert Hinrichs wrote: > > I am totally confused about osirusoft. > 1) I read that they have shut down due to DOS attacks. It appears there > is no way to contact them. Apparently so. > 2) Our spamassassin is labeling as spam, messages that are by no means > spam.

RE: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

courage.. With principles comes integrity!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Hinrichs Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2003 12:11 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad? I am totally confused about osirusoft. 1) I read

[SAtalk] osirusoft gone mad?

I am totally confused about osirusoft. 1) I read that they have shut down due to DOS attacks.  It appears there is no way to contact them. 2) Our spamassassin is labeling as spam, messages that are by no means spam.  The main reason is that the servers are reportedly listed as open relays with

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

Bob Apthorpe wrote: > Richard Ahlquist wrote: > > The only gotchyas are how to maintain it. Who decides who is on it > > and when they come off. > > Balancing anonymity and trust is difficult ... I prefer the benevolent dictator approach, where I get to choose and to ignore the dictators of my ch

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

Hi, On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 23:39:16 -0400 "Richard Ahlquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is similar to something I suggested on /. the other day though I must > confess you have put far more thought into it than I have. A P2P distributed > blacklist could defeat the DDOS attacks centralized se

RE: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob Apthorpe Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 12:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT Hi, On 29 Aug 2003 19:15:15 +0100 Yorkshire Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2003-08-30

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

So the zone file is cryptographically signed, so another sharer cannot change it? This would remove a single DOS target for spammers. But you have to transfer the whole zone file from peer to peer? > This seems like a perfect application for P2P technology; make rbldns or > rbldnsd trivial to conf

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

Hi, On 29 Aug 2003 19:15:15 +0100 Yorkshire Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 04:57, Dragoncrest wrote: > > >Quite. They got pummelled to death by a DDoS. See: > > > > Yeah, stupid pathetic cowardly spammers (I can think of some much > > more colorful choice words

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 04:57, Dragoncrest wrote: > >Quite. They got pummelled to death by a DDoS. See: > > Yeah, stupid pathetic cowardly spammers (I can think of some much > more colorful choice words for this, but I'll save those for later) are now > fighting back by DDoS'ing all the b

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

On 08/29/03 09:39 AM, Frank Pineau sat at the `puter and typed: > > > On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Dragoncrest wrote: > > > > > You'd figure by now that they'd get > > the message that neither they nor their garbage is wanted. But obviously not. > > As long as people continue to respond to their spam

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Dragoncrest wrote: > > You'd figure by now that they'd get > the message that neither they nor their garbage is wanted. But obviously not. As long as people continue to respond to their spam by sending them money, then what message are they expected to get? That spamming

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

Quite. They got pummelled to death by a DDoS. See: Yeah, stupid pathetic cowardly spammers (I can think of some much more colorful choice words for this, but I'll save those for later) are now fighting back by DDoS'ing all the blacklists off the planet just so they can continue to propa

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

At 8/28/03 11:44 PM , Alan Fullmer wrote: never mind, i've been informed they went out of business... is this correct? Quite. They got pummelled to death by a DDoS. See: http://www.cbronline.com/latestnews/0d601ca4ba2fec5080256d910018ca92 http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/communications/story/0,20

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

- Original Message - From: "Alan Fullmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 7:31 AM Subject: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT > anyone having false positives by osirusoft lately? > > everything that comes thru my server is getting

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

iday, August 29, 2003 12:31 AM Subject: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT > anyone having false positives by osirusoft lately? > > everything that comes thru my server is getting tagged. > > anyone else? > > > --- > This sf.net em

[SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT

anyone having false positives by osirusoft lately? everything that comes thru my server is getting tagged. anyone else? --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT cause my subscription to be cancelled??

At 8/27/03 12:38 PM , jpf wrote: > > JPF, looks like our bounce parser has picked up 3 bounce messages per day > > for your address, with the error message "that domain isn't in my list of > > allowed rcpthosts". That error message usually signals a Qmail misconfiguration (or possibly an error in

[SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT cause my subscription to be cancelled??

FYI: I got a notice this morning that my subscription was cancelled to something...below is what the list admin sent me back...perhaps OSIRUSOFT related...I have pointed him to appropriate resources regarding the matter... > > JPF, looks like our bounce parser has picked up 3 bounce messages per d

[SAtalk] osirusoft offline

via http://www.slashdot.org http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/27/0214238&mode=thread&tid=111&tid=126 ariehk writes "As of today, Osirusoft, distributer of the SPEWS and open relay blocklists, among others, is no longer operational. Servers using these lists (including the FTC) are currentl

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

> With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time to stop using them? Those guys are overworking things... My mailserver was blocked due to that i was located in a ip address range that also had a nameserver on it. This nameserver was secondary for a domain that also was primary on a nameser

RE: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

from : Due to the severe drain of resources, relays.osirusoft.com will be down for an undetermined period of time. Please ask all sites using data from relays.osirusoft.com to stop until further notice. Took a dozen tries just to load this simple text web page. HT

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft RBL's are TOAST......

> based on the below post from the Exim list, and other posts, and a bounce > that I received > listing my humble (anti-relayed) server, I'd suggest the following for > folks: > > > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_RELAY 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_DIALUP 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 >

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft RBL's are TOAST......

> based on the below post from the Exim list, and other posts, and a bounce > that I received > listing my humble (anti-relayed) server, I'd suggest the following for > folks: > > > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_RELAY 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_DIALUP 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 >

RE: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 23:32, Yackley, Matt wrote: > I noticed this as well, after having long, long lookup times for the past > couple of days, it started claiming just about every IP that connected to us > was on the list. It really seems to have gone belly up or someone just set > it to respond

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 22:33, James Miller wrote: > With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time to stop using them? [...] > And to add to it, they are (have been since Friday) under a DDoS attack, > their web site is down, mail is not flowing to them (because of the attack I > assume) It's

RE: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

bout this. Regards, Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of James Miller Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 4:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more? With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time

Re: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

Hi, James Miller wrote: With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time to stop using them? As of 12:40 this afternoon our mail server stopped accepting mail from our main web server because it was listed on osirusoft. How I don't know since it doesn't run an SMTP server -- it's protected

Re: [SAtalk] osirusoft RBL's are TOAST......

Thus spake Larry Rosenman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > based on the below post from the Exim list, and other posts, and a bounce > that I received listing my humble (anti-relayed) server, I'd suggest the > following for folks: > > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_RELAY 0 > score RCVD_IN_OSI

RE: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

n use here anymore :) -Original Message- From: James Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 4:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more? With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time to stop using them? As of

[SAtalk] osirusoft RBL's are TOAST......

based on the below post from the Exim list, and other posts, and a bounce that I received listing my humble (anti-relayed) server, I'd suggest the following for folks: score RCVD_IN_OSIRU 0 score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_RELAY 0 score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_DIALUP 0 score RCVD_IN_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC 0 score RCVD_IN_OSIR

[SAtalk] OSIRUSOFT -- should they be used any more?

With all the trouble OSIRUSOFT is having, is it time to stop using them? As of 12:40 this afternoon our mail server stopped accepting mail from our main web server because it was listed on osirusoft. How I don't know since it doesn't run an SMTP server -- it's protected by a dmz firewall which al

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Vivek Khera said: > Is such age-weighting done for the spam corpus as a whole? It seems > to me that some older spam signatures are being phased out and may not > be relevent for current spam... but then maybe I'm wrong about that. Yep, in a more blunt-instrument way; we just try to use the la

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

> "DQ" == Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I'm curious how you GA score the RBL hits. RBL's are by definition >> dynamic with IPs going in and out of the lists all the time. It >> seems to me the only reliable way to score it would be

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm curious how you GA score the RBL hits. RBL's are by definition > dynamic with IPs going in and out of the lists all the time. It > seems to me the only reliable way to score it would be to see if the > IP being tested was in the RBL at the time the m

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Vivek > Khera > Sent: 30 September 2002 14:52 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy? > > > >>>>> "DQ" == Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > DQ> You need to GA score the RBL rules to achieve a

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

> "DQ" == Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DQ> You need to GA score the RBL rules to achieve a good FP:FN ratio. DQ> Without GA scoring of the RBLs, you will raise your FPs too much DQ> because the rest of the GA scores are tuned to achieve a good FP:FN DQ> ratio. I'm curious how y

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Miles Fidelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-28 07:59:30 -0400]: > On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Bob Proulx wrote: > > list spews as the reason. All 105 were spam. That is an average of > > 21 per week, 3 a day, every day, with zero false positives. I also > > I get perhaps 1000 spams a day that are cau

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Bob Proulx wrote: > Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 20:12:53 -0700]: > > My problem with SPEWS is that it is not an accurate way to tag spam. > > There are too many FPs. > > I have heard a lot of derisive commentary about relays.osirusoft.com > but people still

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 21:58:16 -0700]: > You need to GA score the RBL rules to achieve a good FP:FN ratio. > Without GA scoring of the RBLs, you will raise your FPs too much > because the rest of the GA scores are tuned to achieve a good FP:FN > ratio. I disagree that man

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes: > Continuing that thought, I disagree that RBLs should be used by the > GA in SA at all. That RBL data can be different at different times. > I really believe the GA should be trained on the content of the > message without RBL input. If it is deprived of

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Daniel Quinlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-09-27 20:12:53 -0700]: > My problem with SPEWS is that it is not an accurate way to tag spam. > There are too many FPs. I have heard a lot of derisive commentary about relays.osirusoft.com but people still use them. Why? Here is some data. I just went t

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Friday 27 September 2002 20:12, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > So you admit that your provider is harboring spammers and ignoring > > complaints about them. As a customer you're in a better position to > > discuss the problem with your provider than anybody else. > > Wo

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > So you admit that your provider is harboring spammers and ignoring > complaints about them. As a customer you're in a better position to > discuss the problem with your provider than anybody else. Wow, what a flaming strawman argument! I admitted nothing of the sor

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Daniel Quinlan said: > 2. It's not my job. Why should I be forced to harass the ISP because we >are unlucky enough have IP addresses near some spammers? The SPEWS > policy just adds to the harm created by spammers. Spammers know how > to avoid RBLs and often do, they just switch ISPs and c

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I definitely agree that trying to separate out some of the lists might be > a good thing, instead of using relays.osirusoft.com as a single query. Of > course this also has the drawback of requiring more DNS lookups to get a > good sampling of lists, but that's p

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Have you asked your provider why they don't just boot the spammers? No, for several reasons: 1. Free colocation is extremely hard to find. We would be crazy to rock the boat. 2. It's not my job. Why should I be forced to harass the ISP because we are unlucky

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

> Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Yes, but with SPEWS, you are listed if you share the same ISP as a > spammer. I help maintain a /27 network (32 consecutive IP addresses) > used by several non-profit .org sites (no spammers!), but we are listed > on SPEWS because there are spammers

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

For the record, I am aware of the point Dan makes, and in fact I have more-or-less the same point of view. My original posting mentions it specifically as being a "high collateral damage policy". It's unclear to me why Dan quoted this as if it was a counter-point to my message, but just to avo

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Matt Kettler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, going back up in the thread to my posting yesterday: > > http://relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi > > This lists which blocklists that OSI uses are listing an IP, and in the > case of spews, gives links over to spews where you can check

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On 27 Sep 2002 at 11:24, Robert L Mathews wrote: > At 9/27/02 6:51 AM, Michael Moncur wrote: > > >> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules: > >> > >> RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule > >> X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific? > > > >According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS spe

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Yes, going back up in the thread to my posting yesterday: http://relays.osirusoft.com/cgi-bin/rbcheck.cgi This lists which blocklists that OSI uses are listing an IP, and in the case of spews, gives links over to spews where you can check the evidence file for the particular listing. At 12:

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Fri, 2002-09-27 at 04:51, Miles Fidelman wrote: > It sort of a shame that Osirusoft doesn't have a way to indicate which > lists are included in a query-response (e.g. a bit per incorporated list > in its response). Can one query the TXT entry for a listed site to get more detail?

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

At 9/27/02 6:51 AM, Michael Moncur wrote: >> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules: >> >> RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule >> X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific? > >According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS specific: > >>127.0.0.4 Confirmed Spam Source >>A site has been ident

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Malte S. Stretz wrote: > The advantage of Osirusoft.com is that you need only one net query to get > results from all those RBLs merged by Osirusoft. Also should it avoid > double scores because a site listed in two lists returns only one result. > > Malte > > P.S.: Those are

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Friday 27 September 2002 12:05 CET Justin Mason wrote: > Daniel Quinlan said: > > Perhaps we should generally move away from the multiple site rules > > (ones that take inputs from more than one site) and focus on single > > site rules. Then, the GA can do its thing better and we can do our ow

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Daniel Quinlan said: > Perhaps we should generally move away from the multiple site rules (ones > that take inputs from more than one site) and focus on single site > rules. Then, the GA can do its thing better and we can do our own > determination of worth and write our own meta rules rather t

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Daniel Quinlan wrote: >> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules: >> >> RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule >> X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific? Michael Moncur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS specific: | 127.0.0.4 Confirmed Spam Source | A

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

> Being listed in SPEWS will trigger these rules: > > RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM - generic rule > X_OSIRU_SPAM_SRC - SPEWS specific? According to osirusoft, this is not SPEWS specific: >127.0.0.4 Confirmed Spam Source >A site has been identified as a constant source of spam, and is manually

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Justin Mason) writes: > Can SpamAssassin use Osirusoft without the SPEWS results? If not, I > recommend we stop using it. SPEWS just has too many FPs for my taste. That would be fine with me. SPEWS catches a lot of spam, but they intentionally list entire netblocks to press

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Justin Mason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can SpamAssassin use Osirusoft without the SPEWS results? If not, > I recommend we stop using it. SPEWS just has too many FPs for > my taste. The various X_OSIRU... rules separate out the different return values from the Osirusoft DNS check. The RCVD_I

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Thursday 26 September 2002 17:56 CET Justin Mason wrote: > "Rose, Bobby" said: > > Osirusoft is very good because it includes info from many RBLs. The > > only problem is that they mirror SPEWS which is surprising that they > > still do considering all the complaints about SPEWS. > > Can SpamA

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

"Rose, Bobby" said: > Osirusoft is very good because it includes info from many RBLs. The > only problem is that they mirror SPEWS which is surprising that they > still do considering all the complaints about SPEWS. Can SpamAssassin use Osirusoft without the SPEWS results? If not, I recomme

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

tt Kettler; Darren Coleman; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy? On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rose, Bobby wrote: > Does anyone think it's possible to petition Osirusoft to remove SPEWS > from their mirroring? Or would it just be a waste of time? I would > think

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Rose, Bobby wrote: > Does anyone think it's possible to petition Osirusoft to remove SPEWS > from their mirroring? Or would it just be a waste of time? I would > think that anyone who would want to use SPEWS still could but separately > from the larger osirusoft listings.

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

elman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 11:43 AM To: Matt Kettler Cc: Darren Coleman; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy? On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Matt Kettler wrote: > As far as trustworthy goes, I trust osirusoft to pretty much list &g

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Thursday 26 September 2002 04:31, Darren Coleman wrote: > Hi, > > Having received several complaints from customers this morning I was > shocked to discover that several of our mail servers are blacklisted on > relays.osirusoft.com and spews.relays.osirusoft.com. Further investigation > showed

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Matt Kettler wrote: > As far as trustworthy goes, I trust osirusoft to pretty much list everyone > that's questionable and all their neighbors. I don't trust it to be low > collateral damage, hence I don't use them as a flat-out blocklist, and I > generally assign them fewer

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

As far as trustworthy goes, I trust osirusoft to pretty much list everyone that's questionable and all their neighbors. I don't trust it to be low collateral damage, hence I don't use them as a flat-out blocklist, and I generally assign them fewer SA points than the default. In your case, don'

RE: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

26, 2002 7:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy? Hi, Having received several complaints from customers this morning I was shocked to discover that several of our mail servers are blacklisted on relays.osirusoft.com and spews.relays.osirusoft.com. Further

Re: [SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

On Thu, 26 Sep 2002, Darren Coleman wrote: > Has anyone had any experience of dealings with Osirusoft and can > comment/suggest a course of action? Their website doesn't seem to provide > any specific contact information and - and this would be funny if it weren't > tragic - attempting to email

[SAtalk] Osirusoft - trustworthy?

Hi, Having received several complaints from customers this morning I was shocked to discover that several of our mail servers are blacklisted on relays.osirusoft.com and spews.relays.osirusoft.com. Further investigation showed that not only is our entire block of IPs (20 or so Class Cs) listed,