On Thursday 23 February 2006 23:20, Bob McClure Jr wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:59:02PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Thursday 23 February 2006 22:45, Bob McClure Jr wrote:
>> >On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36:19PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Also, where would it put it if i
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:59:02PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Thursday 23 February 2006 22:45, Bob McClure Jr wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36:19PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Also, where would it put it if it did dl a new version of itself?
> >
> >Probably in /etc/mail/s
On Thu 23 Feb 06 20:04, "Jeff Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> That seems your Perl installation lack the DBI module,which is needed
> for accessing mysql in Perl.You should install the DBI and DBD::Mysql
> modules by hand.Certainly,you could go to http://search.cpan.org and
> get them.
In
On Thursday 23 February 2006 22:45, Bob McClure Jr wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36:19PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>
>> I don't seem to be getting any email from RDJ recently. Maybe since
>> the time I switch this system from fetchmail to a mailfile, and from
>> there had kmail running SA
On Thursday 23 February 2006 15:48, Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Mike Jackson wrote:
>> that AOL would never remove from the headers. Now if only I could
>> make Mailman do the same thing...
>
>Enable verp for the list. This sends out every e-mail with a custom
>return-addre
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36:19PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
>
> I don't seem to be getting any email from RDJ recently. Maybe since the
> time I switch this system from fetchmail to a mailfile, and from there
> had kmail running SA which was a cpu killer. Now I have fetchmail
> handing it o
On Thursday 23 February 2006 09:50, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>Doc Schneider wrote:
>> Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > On Thursday 23 February 2006 01:06, Doc Schneider wrote:
>> > > I just committed version 01.00.08 of this ruleset to:
>> > >
>> > > http://rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_stocks.cf
>> > >
>> >
Hi,
That seems your Perl installation lack the DBI module,which is needed for
accessing mysql in Perl.You should install the DBI and DBD::Mysql modules by
hand.Certainly,you could go to http://search.cpan.org and get them.
HTH
-- Joshua Tinnin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Using FreeBSD 6.0-RELEAS
Using FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p4, mysql 4.1.18, p5-Mail-SpamAssassin-3.1.0_6
Using the debug flag, I get:
[25618] dbg: bayes: unable to connect to database: DBI module not
available: No such file or directory
[25618] dbg: bayes: using username: krinklyfig
Now, I don't know why it would be using tha
Dave Pooser wrote:
If you are seeing the AOL members addresses then I'd like to know what you
did to receive them, because you appear the only one is several list I
belong to that are discussing this very issue that is seeing those
addresses.
I'd also like to get the AOL member's address, 'caus
> HelLo -at-use! I fouNd yoUr profile in seaRch result Here. whEn I read
> it I deCidEd to wriTe you and intRoduce mysElf. sO, mY
> nAme iS AnAstasia. I Know tHat my letteR may get loSt among oThers that
> comE to you evEry day, but It will be coOL if yoU'll write
> me. If yoU really searChing
> If you are seeing the AOL members addresses then I'd like to know what you
> did to receive them, because you appear the only one is several list I
> belong to that are discussing this very issue that is seeing those
> addresses.
I'd also like to get the AOL member's address, 'cause I don't get
hi all,
question: what's this list's policy for sending attachments to the list ?
i'm noticing, e.g., *.pl scripts as attachments ... rather than links to
posts at code-paste sites.
iiuc, in general attachments are 'bad form', but given that the list-mgr
is NOT apparently blocking them , it tho
also sprach mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.02.23.2324 +0100]:
> how do you integrate SA with postfix?
I don't. It's called by procmail.
--
martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
\ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
invalid/expired pgp (sub)ke
martin f krafft a écrit :
>
> Well, sure, this makes sense, but how can I support this standard
> use-case? Postfix adding a SASL-header that causes Spamassassin then
> to ignore the message isn't the solution as spammers would simply do
> that sooner or later. Short of whitelisting people, what s
mouss wrote:
In the case of an aol address, one may require that the browser
connected from an aol IP.
Not practical. AOL offers a lower "bring your own connection" rate for
people who want to keep the app and the email, but have broadband access
through another provider. As I understand it
On 2/23/06, Rodney Richison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a howto somewhere to have postfix reject spam with a high score?
> I found one for exim, but not postfix.
>
amavisd-new can be used as a pre-queue smtpd_proxy_filter in postfix.
This works fairly well for low-volume sites.
High vol
> At the risk of starting another "Why are you duplicating
> Rules_du_jour ?"
> aregument . . . :-)
>
> Since people say it needs to be updated, here is a little
> piece of perl I
> use to update my scripts. I wrote it after being completely
> perplexed by the
> rules_du_jour shell script(s).
>
> I
Rodney Richison a écrit :
> Is there a howto somewhere to have postfix reject spam with a high score?
> I found one for exim, but not postfix.
>
you should not discard mail "frivolously" (false positives occur). use a
quarantine mechanism instead (a Junk folder for instance. then you can
quickly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
> Michael Clark wrote:
>
>>No, because then I could use the system to sign you up for lists you
>>didn't sign up for. The token (step 6) must be sent to the email
>>address that was submitted in step 2). Mike
>
>
> There are two distinct tokens. One embedded in the e
Michael Clark a écrit :
> No, because then I could use the system to sign you up for lists you
> didn't sign up for. The token (step 6) must be sent to the email address
> that was submitted in step 2). Mike
>
I guess there is no solution for the first message (requesting
confirmation by sending
Vivek Khera wrote:
On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Mike Jackson wrote:
So, I suppose the question is: How do you deal with getting forwarded
mail through to AOL without being branded as a spammer?
You stop forwarding email to AOL... really.
Other option is to crank up the SA pickiness and tell
- Original Message -
From: "Doc Schneider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sandy S" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: Updated Pump and Dump rules. 2006-02-23
> Sandy S wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Doc Schneider" <[EMAIL PROTE
On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Peter P. Benac wrote:
Now AOL and Yahoo are going to join forces with GOODMAIL.COM.
If you
want to guarantee delivery to AOL then you must pay homage to
GOODMAIL.COM at a rate of .25 to 1 cent per message. At the same time
they will tighten filters for peo
On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Mike Jackson wrote:
So, I suppose the question is: How do you deal with getting
forwarded mail through to AOL without being branded as a spammer?
You stop forwarding email to AOL... really.
Other option is to crank up the SA pickiness and tell the customers
th
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Mike Jackson wrote:
> that AOL would never remove from the headers. Now if only I could make
> Mailman do the same thing...
Enable verp for the list. This sends out every e-mail with a custom
return-address, which you can use to tell who submitted the mail as spam.
===
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DAve wrote:
We have not chosen a course of action yet. It looks as if the only
*solution* is to not send any mail to AOL accounts. From a business
standpoint this is not acceptable. But, if AOL users will tag a
confirmation message as Spam, what's an admin to do?
For a
After reading Mike's emailing about AOL, this stuck out:
I reject mail at the MTA level that's from IPs or domains listed in
Spamhaus (both SBL and
XBL) and bogusmx.rfc-ignorant.org (the only one of their lists I trust
not
to cause false positives when used in this manner).
I think xbl-sbl is
Sandy S wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Doc Schneider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:06 AM
Subject: Updated Pump and Dump rules. 2006-02-23
I just committed version 01.00.08 of this ruleset to:
http://rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_stocks.cf
It sh
> I am receiving, already several weeks, a lot of spam in the following
> form:
> -
> \w+,
>
> http://\w\w.geocities.com/\w+\d+
>
> \w+ \w+
> -
>
> For example:
>
> -
> Beth,
>
> http://au.geocities.com/ethylic40187
>
> Rocco Maldonado
> -
>
> Is it possible to write
Don't tempt me, though that would pay for the goodmail payments.
> Peter P. Benac wrote:
>> Confirmation elimates bad addresses. The major problem comes
>> from people too lazy to unsubscribe from a list. They just hit the
>> spam
>> button. AOL refuses to acknowledge that is happens. Even
Peter P. Benac wrote:
> Confirmation elimates bad addresses. The major problem comes
> from people too lazy to unsubscribe from a list. They just hit the
> spam
> button. AOL refuses to acknowledge that is happens. Even when they
> were shown the e-mail that their member marked as spam.
Wel
Michael Clark wrote:
> No, because then I could use the system to sign you up for lists you
> didn't sign up for. The token (step 6) must be sent to the email
> address that was submitted in step 2). Mike
There are two distinct tokens. One embedded in the email address the user has
to send to, a
No, because then I could use the system to sign you up for lists you
didn't sign up for. The token (step 6) must be sent to the email
address that was submitted in step 2). Mike
At 11:57 AM -0800 2/23/06, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAve wrote:
We have not chosen a course of action yet. It l
Matthew,
This is the way list confirmation works with both Majordomo and Mailman.
I tell all my list opwners to make sure they turn on confirmation even if
the subscribe and unsubscribe functions are open to anyone.
Confirmation elimates bad addresses. The major problem comes from
peopl
After reading Mike's emailing about AOL, this stuck out:
> I reject mail at the MTA level that's from IPs or domains listed in Spamhaus
> (both SBL and
> XBL) and bogusmx.rfc-ignorant.org (the only one of their lists I trust not
> to cause false positives when used in this manner).
I think xbl-
DAve wrote:
> We have not chosen a course of action yet. It looks as if the only
> *solution* is to not send any mail to AOL accounts. From a business
> standpoint this is not acceptable. But, if AOL users will tag a
> confirmation message as Spam, what's an admin to do?
For an outside-the-box kin
Peter P. Benac wrote:
Mike,
You obviously haven't heard all the news about what AOL and Yahoo are
about to do.
First AOL blocked you be cause one or more of those people you
forward mail for has hit that little button that says "This is SPAM".
AOL doesn't really care if the user requ
Now that idea has some merit :) I am working on getting Majordomo to add
the parsed header but an encrypted one is a better idea.
Thanks..
>>I tried that Matthew. It too was changed to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> What I haven't tried is removing the @aol.com.
>
> In a mailing list manager app I
I tried that Matthew. It too was changed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I haven't tried is removing the @aol.com.
In a mailing list manager app I wrote, I simply put a MD5 hash of the
address in the headers. Then I have something to check against the
subscriber list that AOL would never remove fr
I tried that Matthew. It too was changed to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I haven't tried is removing the @aol.com.
> Peter P. Benac wrote:
>> Very true.. I went around and around with AOL over this every issue
>> for three days.
>
> After inspecting some TOS reports...
>
> Sometimes (not always) the
Peter P. Benac wrote:
> Very true.. I went around and around with AOL over this every issue
> for three days.
After inspecting some TOS reports...
Sometimes (not always) the To: field is replaced with .
Sometimes the To: field is preserved.
Sometimes the email is attached. Sometimes the ema
Ah, thanks, that is logical.
I did not know this side :)
Tom
Theo Van Dinter schrieb:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:52:36PM +0100, Thomas Geldner wrote:
Is this a bug ?
4.5 + 0.5 = 5.0 or ? ;)
Not really. It's covered in
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RoundingIssues, but the short version
Very true.. I went around and around with AOL over this every issue for
three days.
I will be happy to forward the dang things to you as well. I may get one
or two that have some how escaped the AOL edits. Those I do receive are
somehow buried in a Receive: mail header.
If you are seeing the A
On 2/23/06, Peter P. Benac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Get enough of those TOS messages in one day and they will still block you
> IP address and any IP address that you have assigned to you.
FUD. They don't block multiple IPs at once as far as I can tell.
> Furthermore, they have already annou
Peter P. Benac wrote:
> AOl will send you what they refer to as a TOS alert wherever anyone
> hits that spam button. They are even nice enough to attach the
> offending message.
>
> They expect you to immediately remove that user from your lists;
> however, they will replace every instance of the
AOl will send you what they refer to as a TOS alert wherever anyone hits
that spam button. They are even nice enough to attach the offending
message.
They expect you to immediately remove that user from your lists; however,
they will replace every instance of the AOL members mail address from the
On Thursday February 23 2006 1:25 pm, Peter P. Benac wrote:
> Mike,
>
> You obviously haven't heard all the news about what AOL and Yahoo are
> about to do.
>
> First AOL blocked you be cause one or more of those people you
> forward mail for has hit that little button that says "This is S
Mike,
You obviously haven't heard all the news about what AOL and Yahoo are
about to do.
First AOL blocked you be cause one or more of those people you
forward mail for has hit that little button that says "This is SPAM".
AOL doesn't really care if the user requested the mail to be
for
You don't.
Only idiots use AOL. AOL management are idiots, so it is a good match.
One of those idiot users will push the AOL spam button on forwarded spam,
that marks your server as a spam source to AOL admins.
Nothing you can do about that. Once that happens a few times you're done.
Better to
I know this isn't directly related to SpamAssassin, but I'm hoping you sys
admins will have some advice to share...
Here's the situation. I'm the sys admin for a web hosting/design company.
We're using Sendmail, with SpamAssassin invoked from procmail. I reject mail
at the MTA level that's fro
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:52:36PM +0100, Thomas Geldner wrote:
> Is this a bug ?
> 4.5 + 0.5 = 5.0 or ? ;)
Not really. It's covered in
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RoundingIssues, but the short version is:
> -
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,DATE_IN_PAS
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 18:52 +0100, Thomas Geldner wrote:
> Is this a bug ?
> 4.5 + 0.5 = 5.0 or ? ;)
> snip
> -
> X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,DATE_IN_PAST_03_06
> autolearn=no version=3.1.0
> X-Spam-Spam-Report:
> * 0.5 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date
Is this a bug ?
4.5 + 0.5 = 5.0 or ? ;)
snip
-
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_99,DATE_IN_PAST_03_06
autolearn=no version=3.1.0
X-Spam-Spam-Report:
* 0.5 DATE_IN_PAST_03_06 Date: is 3 to 6 hours before
Received: date
* 4.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Ba
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Justin Mason wrote:
>
> martin f krafft writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > we have a bunch of users who use our SASL-enabled SMTP server to
> > relay their mail when on the road. This causes the following
> > Received header:
> >
> > Received: from septumania (217-162-227-XXX.dclient.h
Title: RE: rule for spam with geocities link, multiline expression
> -Original Message-
> From: Maarten de Boer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:06 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: rule for spam with geocities link, multiline _expressi
- Original Message -
From: "Doc Schneider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 12:06 AM
Subject: Updated Pump and Dump rules. 2006-02-23
> I just committed version 01.00.08 of this ruleset to:
>
> http://rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_stocks.cf
>
> It should appea
Is there a howto somewhere to have postfix reject spam with a high score?
I found one for exim, but not postfix.
--
Highest Regards,
Rodney Richison
RCR Computing
http://www.rcrnet.net
118 N. Broadway
Cleveland, OK 74020
918-358-
Patrick Sneyers wrote:
Op 21-feb-06, om 16:08 heeft Matt Kettler het volgende geschreven:
Patrick Sneyers wrote:
These don't hit very much in my setup. They get caught with the new
Reverse-Check feature in CommuniGate.
Do you know what this test does?
I've been getting wuite a few of these
Large health care enterprise, ~6500 users on Novell Groupwise. We've
been using SA on SusE with AmavisD, SARE, Razor, etc for two years (came
from Guinievere on NT). ~20M inbound SMTP connections per year, ~65-68%
spam/viruses, and we're blissfully happy with the SA setup.
In fact, despite the vol
Simon Leung wrote:
>
> I have been pulling my hair out from this "Ricky invites you to blah
> blah blah..." getting through my server (SA3.1 + MD 2.56 + RDJ). I
> added "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" into the blacklist_from, but it still gets
> through ? There're SA tests matched as shown below but they
Doc Schneider wrote:
> Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Thursday 23 February 2006 01:06, Doc Schneider wrote:
> > > I just committed version 01.00.08 of this ruleset to:
> > >
> > > http://rulesemporium.com/rules/70_sare_stocks.cf
> > >
> > > It should appear within the hour.
> >
> > I've copied this
Hi,jdow,
I think you have misunderstood me.I'm not working for Netzero.In fact,our mail
systems' end-users numbers are more than a hundred million far away.We use SA
as part of our antispam mechanism.Certainly,it's not the original one written
with Perl.We disable the Bayes currently,and only u
Hi,Jdow,
I think you have misunderstood me.I'm not working for Netzero.In fact,our mail
systems' end-users numbers are more than a hundred million far away.We use SA
as part of our antispam mechanism. Certainly,it's not the original one written
with Perl.We disable the Bayes currently,and only
Interesting subject words:
Subject: *SPAM* 013.9 ** bayesian teetotal at blutwurst
Rght!
{^_-}
After I replied offline I did some looking around
Er, I just looked up on a size ranking from November 20th last year. NetZero
was set at 8,600,000 members. AOL is only 22,200,000 members. Do you mean
100,000,000 EMAILS PER DAY or something? That makes more sense and is maybe
somewhat low.
8
martin f krafft writes:
> Hi,
>
> we have a bunch of users who use our SASL-enabled SMTP server to
> relay their mail when on the road. This causes the following
> Received header:
>
> Received: from septumania (217-162-227-XXX.dclient.hispeed.ch
> [217.162.227.XXX])
> (using SSLv3 wi
Hi,
we have a bunch of users who use our SASL-enabled SMTP server to
relay their mail when on the road. This causes the following
Received header:
Received: from septumania (217-162-227-XXX.dclient.hispeed.ch
[217.162.227.XXX])
(using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits))
(
I really mean a hundred million.
that sounds like hotmail or something.
Hello,
I am receiving, already several weeks, a lot of spam in the following
form:
-
\w+,
http://\w\w.geocities.com/\w+\d+
\w+ \w+
-
For example:
-
Beth,
http://au.geocities.com/ethylic40187
Rocco Maldonado
-
Is it possible to write a rule to detect these? I
From: "Jeff Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I really mean a hundred million.
Jeff, if you are ever permitted to and are moved to describe that
installation sometime I'd be an avid reader. You must have an amazing
array of equipment involved in the filtering and email handling.
{^_^}
Hi there,
I have been pulling my hair out from this "Ricky invites you to blah blah
blah..." getting through my server (SA3.1 + MD 2.56 + RDJ). I added
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" into the blacklist_from, but it still gets through ?
There're SA tests matched as shown below but they didn't stop it ???
72 matches
Mail list logo
