On Thursday 03 October 2002 08:48, Mariano Absatz wrote:
> El 2 Oct 2002 a las 16:13, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth escribió:
> > > I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> > > entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use
> > > in this way to rogue states.
> >
El 2 Oct 2002 a las 16:13, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth escribió:
> > I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> > entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use
> > in this way to rogue states.
>
> Doesn't that method filter after receipt? Also, doesn't it let
On Wednesday 02 October 2002 17:13, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
> > I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> > entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use > in
> > this way to rogue states.
>
> Doesn't that method filter after receipt? Also, doesn't i
On Wed, 2 Oct 2002, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
> (if SPEWS ran our justice system, it would be "better to convict 100
> innocents rather than let a single guilty person slip past").
It's more like barricading all the streets into a neighborhood until the
neighbors (or the landlord) burn down t
> I use TMDA and simply add to its blacklist_wildcards list
> entries like *@=.kn (bye-bye North Korea) I currently limit its use > in this way
>to rogue states.
Doesn't that method filter after receipt? Also, doesn't it let through
forged headers? As I previously stated, I prefer to blo
On Wednesday 02 October 2002 13:17, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
> I didn't see all that much rhetoric. I'm not using the isp blocks, just
> the cn-kr and nigeria list. Since it's a private mail server, I have the
> advantage of being able to implement blocks of entire countries. I
> couldn't
i agree with you, particularly now that i've counted that (off hours)
2/3 of the mail being delivered to a company whose firewalls i manage
was graded as spam by sa. at the point we needed to add an extra
machine purely for spam assassin, i decided to get serious about blocking,
which i'd previou
> Useful resource? From the rhetoric on that site, I wouldn't use any
> of the site's data without checking each entry first. I've been
> looking at a number of RBL sites recently and have reluctantly come to
> the conclusion that objectivity is not high on their list of things to
> do. They gi
On Wednesday 02 October 2002 10:08, Simon Matthews wrote:
> At 09:50 AM 10/2/02 -0800, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
> >I've always considered filtering spam as the last resort. I prefer
> >blocking at the mta if at all possible. Here's a useful resource:
> >http://www.blackholes.us/
>
> Interest
On Wednesday 02 October 2002 10:50, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
> I've always considered filtering spam as the last resort. I prefer
> blocking at the mta if at all possible. Here's a useful resource:
> http://www.blackholes.us/
>
> Rossz
>
Useful resource? From the rhetoric on that site, I wo
PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Simon
| Matthews
| Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:08 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: Re: [SAtalk] useful blackholes
|
|
|
|
| At 09:50 AM 10/2/02 -0800, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
| >I've always considered filterin
with a couple whitelist entries.
-Original Message-
From: Simon Matthews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [SAtalk] useful blackholes
At 09:50 AM 10/2/02 -0800, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
>I
At 09:50 AM 10/2/02 -0800, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth wrote:
>I've always considered filtering spam as the last resort. I prefer
>blocking at the mta if at all possible. Here's a useful resource:
>http://www.blackholes.us/
Interesting, but one of my company's mailservers is listed in the XO
bloc
13 matches
Mail list logo
