Hi,
the IP
219 dot 144 dot 194 dot 158
is shown as listed by http://www.rulesemporium.com/cgi-bin/uribl.cgi - a
phishing mail with
http://219dot144dot194dot158:8081/secure.dresdner-privat.de/fb/privat/login/login.htm
in it's body does not trigger any uribl rules tho. Why is that so?
cheers,
wol
On Aug 9, 2005, at 8:06 PM, Rob McEwen wrote:
John Rudd mentioned:
(For all of you people who like to send a "undisclosed recipients"
message to all of your friends: yes, I'm calling you spammers, and I
am
unapologetic about it. If you don't like it, don't send me email.)
message for Joh
On Aug 9, 2005, at 9:05 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Rudd writes:
After reading through this thread, I decided to formally define my own
definition of spam (since others are basically trying to do that,
etc.).
BTW, before we go too far down thi
> My $.02 here...
> Why doesn't he put together a nice presentation package and mail it to
> them? I think I know the real reason -- it costs money. It could be
> argued that sending an email costs money, but hardly the cost of putting
> together a decent presentation on a few sheets of flashy/nice
From: "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is exactly why if, given the choice, I'd prefer to be "cold-called"
with a non-bulk personalized unsolicited e-mail rather than being
interrupted by a visitor or phone call. The former I can look at a time of
my own choosing, the later demands my partic
>> Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
>> unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the
>> same?
>
>Of course we treat them the same. They all go through SpamAssassin. If the
recipient thinks it is >spam, it gets added and reported to SpamCop.
>
From: "SM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 18:04 09-08-2005, jdow wrote:
Worrying about "bulk" or not is a distraction. It's not in issue. What
will the recipients think? How are they likely to react? What makes you
think it will get through the email process with NOBODY complaining to
a blacklist or sy
Hello Greg,
Tuesday, August 9, 2005, 9:38:03 PM, you wrote:
GA> But if you do manage multiple users accounts, you have to provide industry
GA> standard anti-spam protection without blocking on your own definition of
GA> "spam". Now if you are only talking your own email box, you can define every
Dan mentioned:
>If your company needs to stoop to something this unethical
Just for the record, this is a sales person for a company that I host and
maintain a website for. This is not "my company"... but they overall a very
ethical company and currently fast growing. Also, this was just one of th
Dr Robert Young wrote:
We have been using Razor2 for some time on SA 3.0.4. I was recently
reading about DCC. We have never tried it, so I was wondering about
opinions as to its use. How effective is it? Should it be used with,
or in place of, Razor?
SpamAssassin will use both, so there'
I believe this is why services such as Yahoo email started calling it "bulk"
instead of "spam". I also call it bulk to my users for the same reason.
It's much easier to define bulk than it is to define spam. Spam is in the
eye of the beholder as you can even see on this list.
But I must say, some
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Thomas Cameron wrote:
> Nope - I own a small business and I dealt with B2B spam as often as I
> dealt with B2C. It's all spam, and it all ends with the same results -
> the spammer loses my biz forever.
Real reputable companies don't _need_ to spam.
There are legitimate venue
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:56 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> >There is no way you can prove in your message
> >that it is not a spam run of 10,000.
>
> If it wasn't personalized or very personalized, then that would be true.
Is it unsolicited? Is it commercial? Is it e-mail?
Then it's spam. Don't m
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 16:36 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> But I do hate the idea of someone sending out < 10 unsolicited but
> hand-typed e-mails being treated the same as a spammer sending out 10,000
> unsolicited and impersonal e-mails per day... but somehow I think that this
> is already taken car
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>BTW, before we go too far down this rabbit-hole, everyone please note
>that actually, the SpamAssassin project *does* have its own definition
>of spam: that being Unsolicited Bulk Email.
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/Spam
>
>We could have a very long discussion
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 15:59 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> OBSERVATION:
>
> Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
> unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the same?
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. No matter
if it's B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Rudd writes:
> After reading through this thread, I decided to formally define my own
> definition of spam (since others are basically trying to do that,
> etc.).
BTW, before we go too far down this rabbit-hole, everyone please note
that actua
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 23:06 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> I applaud both of your tenacity in your fight against spam... but do you
> really think that the average user is going to be soo offended by the
> particular message that I originally described on this thread if received
> only once?
Godd
On Tue, 2005-08-09 at 13:37 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> When is Bulk "Bulk"?
>
> The reason I ask is because I have a client who sends unsolicited e-mails to
> prospective clients. But he does this manually by visiting relevant web
> sites and then one-at-a-time, he personally e-mails these prospec
>...
"Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 01:36PM:
>> Of course I don't propose any sort of rules changes. Generally,
>> someone's
>> bad behavior will speak for itself in that the more egregious their
>> spamming, the more URI & RBL blacklists they will appear on. Also, use
>>
--On Saturday, August 06, 2005 4:18 PM -0700 jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
By that I meant that "telnet localhost pop3" followed by an "retr 1"
(once logged in) showed the spaces normalized to exactly one in all cases.
That's interesting... I just went checking my uncaught spam folder for
>...
>E. Falk wrote:
>> Rob McEwen wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
>>> that
>>> ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
>
>Hmm, how about "Hi, I see you have a link on your web page to my site at
>XYZ. I'm moving
>...
>Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning?
>
>For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to
>this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam
>snippets would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably
>thinks very highly of
I think that it is about time for at least couple of you to take some time
off and go to the beach or see a movie or something... Or, maybe you can go
to the gym and paste a picture of your favorite spam king on the punching
bag? :)
...back to business...
> jdow wrote:
...well, a lot of stuff...
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 12:31:50PM +1000, Hanh Dao wrote:
> After upgrading SpamAssassin from version 2.5x to 3.0.4 I can't start
> spamassassin. Error
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] init.d]# ./spamassassin start
> Starting spamd: The -a option has been removed. Please look at the
> use_auto_whitelist confi
After upgrading SpamAssassin from version 2.5x to 3.0.4
I can't start spamassassin. Error
[EMAIL PROTECTED] init.d]# ./spamassassin startStarting
spamd: The -a option has been removed. Please look at the
use_auto_whitelist config option
instead.
After reading through this thread, I decided to formally define my own
definition of spam (since others are basically trying to do that,
etc.).
A) It does not matter, one way or the other, if the message is
automatically generated or hand generated. If you don't want to wear
your fingers d
At 18:04 09-08-2005, jdow wrote:
Worrying about "bulk" or not is a distraction. It's not in issue. What
will the recipients think? How are they likely to react? What makes you
think it will get through the email process with NOBODY complaining to
a blacklist or sysadmin?
I mentioned complaints.
Hello Jack,
Tuesday, August 9, 2005, 6:15:22 AM, you wrote:
JG> I am trying to pass CNN "breaking news" alerts through the filters. My
JG> user_prefs contains:
JG> whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG> and even
JG> whitelist_from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JG> The problem is that they are sendi
I went with the RBL method. More than 1 way to skin a spammer. :-)
Anyways, they put themselves into my bayes with the extra points of the
china RBL. Life is good... Now I can back down on the China points some
since my bayes will more likely catch this garbage.
Content preview: myrtis
http
From: "Kelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
jdow wrote:
Not spam. It's somebody with whom you have a significant prior
relationship.
Agreed. I was mainly looking to see if anyone thought it *was* spam,
and if so, why... and also to see how people articulated the difference
between an out-of-the-blu
From: "SM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This is indeed a slippery slope. The emails are unsolicited. This
one is too as we do not have any business relationship. :-) In
business, there are times when we might email someone or even phone
that person even if we have no prior relationship with the
person.
jdow wrote:
Not spam. It's somebody with whom you have a significant prior
relationship.
Agreed. I was mainly looking to see if anyone thought it *was* spam,
and if so, why... and also to see how people articulated the difference
between an out-of-the-blue "please update your link" and a sim
At 14:56 09-08-2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
Thanks for the feedback... but it looks like you e-mailed this directly to
me without sending it to the spamassassin thread
. Please consider re-sending this to the SA
list so that other can benefit from your comment... as you probably
intended! --Rob McEwen
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 18:19, jdow wrote:
>It's pocket change, though.
>{o.o}
Chuckle, for him maybe. To me though, its obvious I'm not wearing the
right trowsers as I rarely find more than $200 in cash in them.
Where do I find clothes with that sort of pocket change in them? :-)
[...]
--
From: "Greg Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-Original Message-
From: Mike Wiebeld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't think you understand the situation. How is the recipient
supposed to know whether it is actually a hand crafted email sent
just to him or a spam run of 10,000?
Because there
From: "Mike Wiebeld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 12:59PM:
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the
same?
Of course we treat them the same. Th
From: "Kelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
E. Falk wrote:
Rob McEwen wrote:
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
Hmm, how about "Hi, I see you have a link on your web page to my site at
XY
From: "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the same?
<< jdow: Unsolicited business to business comes in two flavors. Someone
wants to sell me his superwhi
From: "E. Falk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rob McEwen wrote:
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
I'm really curious as to how we would defined "solicited" e-mail. As far
as "bulk" e-mail
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
all this info is useful on the bug, not on this side discussion.
- --j.
Craig McLean writes:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> FWIW I *don't* see this issue on FBSD 5.2.1 running SA 3.0.4 with perl 5.6.1
>
> Craig.
>
> Justin
Michael Parker wrote:
Steven Stern wrote:
Don't expire things manually.
1. Why not?
2. On a Bayes SQL setup with multiple servers feeding/reading the db,
should one server be responsible for expiration or should each
opportunistically take care of it?
I'll be more specific, don't expi
Steven Stern wrote:
>
>>
>> Don't expire things manually.
>>
>>
>
> 1. Why not?
>
> 2. On a Bayes SQL setup with multiple servers feeding/reading the db,
> should one server be responsible for expiration or should each
> opportunistically take care of it?
>
>
I'll be more specific, don't expire th
Don't expire things manually.
1. Why not?
2. On a Bayes SQL setup with multiple servers feeding/reading the db,
should one server be responsible for expiration or should each
opportunistically take care of it?
--
Steve
From: "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Clarification of my last message:
When I asked "What about unsolicited political or non-profit e-mails?",
please don't misunderstand me. I'm NOT saying that all political or
non-profit are not spam... I was only responding to another's definition
of
spam
From: "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
<
If a local business spams me I am likely to walk in and "make it
personal" very loudly, too. (I've done it
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Wiebeld [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 4:49 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: When is Bulk "Bulk"
>
>
>
> >>> "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 01:36PM:
> > Of course I don't propose any sor
It's pocket change, though.
{o.o}
- Original Message -
From: "Matt Kettler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-08-09T155406Z_01_N09617369_RTRIDST_0_TECH-TECH-MICROSOFT-SPAM-DC.XML
Although on one hand, I hate to see
Ilan Aisic wrote:
Just my 2 cents:
I don't see the ALL_TRUSTED ever in action because at my MTA level
(Exim 4.5), I don't direct mail that comes from my internal network
through SA.
Anyone sees a reason to do so?
I do recommend directing all the internal email through an anti-virus
(ClamAV in m
>There is no way you can prove in your message
>that it is not a spam run of 10,000.
If it wasn't personalized or very personalized, then that would be true.
However, there are a number of statements and questions that are specific to
your business and could not possibly have been computer generat
http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2005-08-09T155406Z_01_N09617369_RTRIDST_0_TECH-TECH-MICROSOFT-SPAM-DC.XML
Although on one hand, I hate to see Microsoft gaining money, I'm also greatly
pleased to see Scott Richter (OptInRealBig.com) loosing it.
>>> "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 01:36PM:
> Of course I don't propose any sort of rules changes. Generally,
> someone's
> bad behavior will speak for itself in that the more egregious their
> spamming, the more URI & RBL blacklists they will appear on. Also, use
> of
> sp
> Are these the same recipients who find it easier to report an item as
> spam than unsubscribe from the list they had to confirm three times
> that
> they wanted to be on? :)
>
> The problem is compounded with my users because when a person leaves
> the
> company their e-mail address (along
Mike Wiebeld said:
>Of course we treat them the same. They all go through SpamAssassin. If
>the >recipient thinks it is spam, it gets added and reported to
>SpamCop.
>Are you proposing some method of determining whether an email is
>Business->to-Consumer or Business-To-Business and treating th
Mike Wiebeld wrote:
"Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 12:59PM:
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the
same?
Of course we treat them the same. They all go through S
Rob McEwen wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
> "Therefore, to me, and many others, it doesn't matter how few messages there
> are, or how individual the message is. If it's unsolicited email of a
> commercial nature, it's spam. Period."
>
> BTW - Matt, would an e-mail asking for link exchanges between
James said:
>My $.02 here...
>Why doesn't he put together a nice presentation package and mail it to
>them? I think I know the real reason -- it costs money. It could be
>argued that sending an email costs money, but hardly the cost of putting
>together a decent presentation on a few sheets of f
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 16:13, Dan Hollis wrote:
>On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
>> If not, the perhaps some people's irritation about getting called
>> at dinner-time for the 10th time by the same phone company be
>> influencing their opinions here?
>
>More like being woken up at 4am for
Rob McEwen wrote:
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the same?
If not, the perhaps some people's irritation about getting called at
dinner-time for the 10th time by the same phone compa
Kelson wrote:
E. Falk wrote:
Rob McEwen wrote:
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
Hmm, how about "Hi, I see you have a link on your web page to my site
at XYZ. I'm moving to
I seem to be at a loss. I have installed SA 3.0.4 on two identical
machines. Both machines are running CentOS4.1. Other software loaded would
include:
Sendmail 8-13.4-1 (from src rpm)
Clamav 0-86 (tar file)
MailScanner 4.44.1-1 (tar)
MailWatch 1.0.1 (tar)
phpMyAdmin 2.6.3-pl1 (tar)
Webmin 1.210
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 15:55, Steve Martin wrote:
>Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning?
>
>For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to
>this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam
>snippets would probably pollute the bayses datab
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Rob McEwen wrote:
> If not, the perhaps some people's irritation about getting called at
> dinner-time for the 10th time by the same phone company be influencing their
> opinions here?
More like being woken up at 4am for a sales pitch for sears vacuum claners
from a call cente
Bob Pierce wrote:
>We're running spamassassin with a MySQL bayes database that is shared by
>4 scanning servers.
>
>We had been initially using the bayes auto expire option in local.cf,
>but found that this occasionally caused table corruption.
>
>
Corruption? Well, that would be a bug then, ca
'sa-learn --force-expire' is your friend. Just run it on one of the
servers periodically. I run it once every four hours.
Bob Pierce thought no one was listening and belted out:
We're running spamassassin with a MySQL bayes database that is shared by
4 scanning servers.
We had been initially
>>> "Rob McEwen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/05 12:59PM:
> OBSERVATION:
>
> Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
> unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the
> same?
Of course we treat them the same. They all go through SpamAssassin.
E. Falk wrote:
Rob McEwen wrote:
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
Hmm, how about "Hi, I see you have a link on your web page to my site at
XYZ. I'm moving to ABC, and would appr
We're running spamassassin with a MySQL bayes database that is shared by
4 scanning servers.
We had been initially using the bayes auto expire option in local.cf,
but found that this occasionally caused table corruption.
With auto expire turned off, everything works fine, but after a while
our ba
OBSERVATION:
Could some of us be treating unsolicited Business-to-Consumer and
unsolicited Business-To-Business the same? Should they be treated the same?
If not, the perhaps some people's irritation about getting called at
dinner-time for the 10th time by the same phone company be influencing th
Steve Martin wrote:
Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning?
For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to this
mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam snippets
would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably thinks very
Is it possible to selectively disable bayes autolearning?
For example, I would like auto learning disabled for mail sent to
this mailing list since all this spam discussion and forwarded spam
snippets would probably pollute the bayses database (which probably
thinks very highly of geocities
From: Rob McEwen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Matt Kettler wrote:
> "Therefore, to me, and many others, it doesn't matter how few messages
> there are, or how individual the message is. If it's unsolicited email of
> a commercial nature, it's spam. Period."
>
> BTW - Matt, would an e-mail asking
Rob McEwen wrote:
Does anyone else consider SpamHaus's definition as too weak and believe
that
ANY unsolicited e-mail is spam, even if a personally hand-typed note?
I'm really curious as to how we would defined "solicited" e-mail. As far
as "bulk" e-mail goes, it's fairly easy. Do I solicit t
I got an email to my postmaster account one time, at a job I was working,
from a guy in the Philipines who buys and sells domains. Just so happened
a VP at the company loved the domain name and was thrilled to buy it for
something like $150 cheap. I don't mind cold emails as much as cold calls
on m
Rob McEwen wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
"Therefore, to me, and many others, it doesn't matter how few messages there
are, or how individual the message is. If it's unsolicited email of a
commercial nature, it's spam. Period."
BTW - Matt, would an e-mail asking for link exchanges between web sites
Clarification of my last message:
When I asked "What about unsolicited political or non-profit e-mails?",
please don't misunderstand me. I'm NOT saying that all political or
non-profit are not spam... I was only responding to another's definition of
spam as being "unsolicited email of a commercial
Matt Kettler wrote:
"Therefore, to me, and many others, it doesn't matter how few messages there
are, or how individual the message is. If it's unsolicited email of a
commercial nature, it's spam. Period."
BTW - Matt, would an e-mail asking for link exchanges between web sites be
considered "comme
Of course, if you want to match *any* Geocities URL (which I think is a
bit much for a 4-point score), you'd want something like this:
uri GEOCITIES /\.geocities\.com\b/i
or if you want to make sure it matches the domain name,
uri GEOCITIES /^http:\/\/[a-z0-9-]{1,30}\
> -Original Message-
> From: Billy Huddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 12:55 PM
> Subject: Question about addons
>
>
> Anyone have a method of delivering a message to a local
> mailbox if it's spam
> and then allowing the user to forward it on if it's n
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Rob McEwen wrote:
When is Bulk "Bulk"?
http://www.spamlaws.com
<
Dr Robert Young wrote:
> We have been using Razor2 for some time on SA 3.0.4. I was recently
> reading about DCC. We have never tried it, so I was wondering about
> opinions as to its use. How effective is it? Should it be used with, or
> in place of, Razor?
I use it with razor.
As for effic
Rob McEwen wrote:
> When is Bulk "Bulk"?
>
> The reason I ask is because I have a client who sends unsolicited e-mails to
> prospective clients. But he does this manually by visiting relevant web
> sites and then one-at-a-time, he personally e-mails these prospective
> clients. I don't consider th
We have been using Razor2 for some time on SA 3.0.4. I was recently
reading about DCC. We have never tried it, so I was wondering about
opinions as to its use. How effective is it? Should it be used with,
or in place of, Razor?
From: "Bob McClure Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:29:07AM +0200, Joe Borg wrote:
Hi,
I've setup procmail so as to not deliver mails with a Spam score of 10 or
greater, as follows:
#Mail that scores 10 or more is not delivered to users.
:0
* ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\
Anyone have a method of delivering a message to a local mailbox if it's spam
and then allowing the user to forward it on if it's not a quartine system,
kinda like POSTINI does it? I've got a few of my customers looking for
something like that, I can run them through my SA servers, and tag spam,
Rob McEwen wrote:
> When is Bulk "Bulk"?
http://www.spamlaws.com
--
Matthew.van.Eerde (at) hbinc.com 805.964.4554 x902
Hispanic Business Inc./HireDiversity.com Software Engineer
When is Bulk "Bulk"?
The reason I ask is because I have a client who sends unsolicited e-mails to
prospective clients. But he does this manually by visiting relevant web
sites and then one-at-a-time, he personally e-mails these prospective
clients. I don't consider this spam because it is not bulk
E. Falk wrote:
Anyone else been seeing a lot of these come in? The text includes a
snippet about the Iran Nuclear situation and a link to a "full article".
The article appears to have been pinched from elsewhere, but the page
includes javascript which appears to use a buffer overflow to load a
> From: E. Falk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Anyone else been seeing a lot of these come in? The text
> includes a snippet about the Iran Nuclear situation and a
> link to a "full article".
> The article appears to have been pinched from elsewhere, but
> the page includes javascript which ap
>...
>Anyone else been seeing a lot of these come in? The text includes a
>snippet about the Iran Nuclear situation and a link to a "full article".
>The article appears to have been pinched from elsewhere, but the page
>includes javascript which appears to use a buffer overflow to load a
>.hta
Jonathan Nichols wrote:
uri GEOCITIES /uk.geocities.com/i
describe GEOCITIESHigh amounts of spam from Geocities.
score GEOCITIES 4.0
... spamassassin --lint came out ok.
Will this work, or have I accomplished something that I wasn't actually
trying to do? ;)
A better ap
Anyone else been seeing a lot of these come in? The text includes a
snippet about the Iran Nuclear situation and a link to a "full article".
The article appears to have been pinched from elsewhere, but the page
includes javascript which appears to use a buffer overflow to load a
.hta file.
Al
I've been running spamc and spamd (3.0.4) on FreeBSD 4.10 with Perl 5.8.5
for quite a while, but using the -u vmail flag doesn't cause any problems.
vmail 15329 0.0 2.9 59052 30300 ?? INsJ 5:55AM 0:03.05
/usr/local/bin/spamd -x -d -m 2 -r /var/run/spamd/spamd.pid -u vmail
--socketpath=/t
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 09:29:07AM +0200, Joe Borg wrote:
> Hi,
> I've setup procmail so as to not deliver mails with a Spam score of 10 or
> greater, as follows:
>
> #Mail that scores 10 or more is not delivered to users.
> :0
> * ^X-Spam-Level: \*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*
> /var/spool/mail/spam
>
> A
It's also preferable to use whitelist_from_rcvd.
Unless you really want to let spam from spoofed cnn.com email addresses
through.
Phil
Phil Randal
Network Engineer
Herefordshire Council
Hereford, UK
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Craig McLean wrote:
I applied the patch, and it fixed things on my end. I noted in my PR that
it was also odd to me that before, the children showed in ps as "perl" and
afterwards as "perl5.8.6" or something very similar.
FWIW I *don't* see this issue on FBSD 5.2.1 runni
Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I belive you can do it like so...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Indulge me for a moment.
>
> It has been much too long since I thanked the developers of this program.
> You have no idea what a difference it has made in my life. I have an "old"
> address, one tha
Indulge me for a moment.
It has been much too long since I thanked the developers of this program.
You have no idea what a difference it has made in my life. I have an "old"
address, one that's been around for almost ten years, and spamassassin
catches more than 1000 spams a day aimed directly
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 03:40:10PM -0400, Kris Deugau wrote:
> > I get very frequent errors in syslog as follows:
> > spamd[12739]: cannot write to /home/adam/.spamassassin/bayes_journal,
> > Bayes db update ignored: Permission denied
> > spamd[16734]: Cannot open bayes databases
> > /home/adam/.sp
Hi!
Try:
http://rulesemporium.com/programs/
Ingo
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Yette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2005 3:08 PM
Subject: Sa-stats 0.9
http://www.rulesemporium.com/programs/sa-stats-0.9.txt
Link is now dead...is this floating around anywh
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
