Marc Perkel wrote:
Has anyone done this or anything like it?
http://www.spamdontbuyit.org/ is another one.
It's not terribly detailed, but it focuses on the economic issue. They
have a great diagram illustrating the disparity between the large number
of messages a spammer sends out and the
LDB wrote:
I am invoking spamc through a filter script where spamd is listening.
Also, I am using PostFix as the MTA. My platform is Debian Linux. I am
SA version 3.0.3.
The below config. captures about 1700 spams a day but it is NOT enough.
Can anyone kindly suggest a better more strict conf
> If all the rule does is check for uri's in a certain form, then I would
say
> that this specific rule can backfire on completely legitimate mail.
Essentially ALL spam rules "can" misfire on legit mail. In fact
statistically most of them WILL misfire on some small percentage of legit
mail. If t
I am invoking spamc through a filter script where spamd is listening. Also, I am
using PostFix as the MTA. My platform is Debian Linux. I am SA version 3.0.3.
The below config. captures about 1700 spams a day but it is NOT enough.
Can anyone kindly suggest a better more strict config. for me or
From: "Wiebe Cazemier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hi,
What exactly does the URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI rule mean? The description is:
URI: CGI in .info TLD other than third-level "www"
I get false positive spam which have URI's in the .info TLD in it. Like:
http://foo.hello.info/forum/vi
Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
> On Thursday 04 May 2006 16:00, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
>
> > uri URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI /^(?:https?:\/\/)?[^\/]+(? > {7,}\.info\/(?=\S{15,})\S*\?/i
> >
> > Let's see if I can get this straight...
> >
> > (?:https?:\/\/)? (optionally) "http://"; or "https://"; followed by
>
-Original Message-
From: Martin Hepworth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 8:43 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: home owner
Jean-Paul
If can put the full email on a web page (headers and all)...
I can run it over my system, and let you know which
On Thursday 04 May 2006 16:00, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
> uri URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI /^(?:https?:\/\/)?[^\/]+(? {7,}\.info\/(?=\S{15,})\S*\?/i
>
> Let's see if I can get this straight...
>
> (?:https?:\/\/)? (optionally) "http://"; or "https://"; followed by
> [^\/]+ one or more of any
At 8:03 AM -0700 5/4/06, Marc Perkel wrote:
Has anyone done this or anything like it?
http://spam.getnetwise.org We're in PcMagazine's annual Top 100
Classic web sites, used to be linked from the home pages of AOL.com,
MSNBC.com, hotmail.com, etc... Yes, I'm the webmaster for the site.
Mike
Can be done with brute-force rule creation, EG: # ISKIMARO 66.55.160.0/19 (12/8/05) SBL11507 header L_RCVD_SPAMMER161 Received =~ /\[66\.55\.1[678]\d\.\d{1,3}\]/ describe L_RCVD_SPAMMER161 ISKIMARO Spamhaus score L_RCVD_SPAMMER161 1.5Bit of a pain to maintain but does work. The only
On Thursday, May 4, 2006, 8:03:36 AM, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I hope I'm not the first one who has though of this but suppose we
> created a web site with material to educate the public on how not to get
> ripped off from spam. The idea being that it is both simple and
> comprehensive and targeted
Thanks for your feedback.
Amavisd runs spamassassin from a dedicated (non-root) login and the
user_prefs file is read for that user for all emails processed by amavisd.
This is what I believe, and I have seen results that support this belief.
But this is the area of my problems, so perhaps I
Does anyone here have any experience using spamnix and feel pretty
knowledgeable about the software? If so, does it display the SA
rules that a message actually meets or does it just assign a general
score without showing how that score was achieved?
Thanks again!
Jacob Hoppe
Information Tec
On Mittwoch, 3. Mai 2006 22:10 Brent Kennedy wrote:
> My problem with that
> is that some companies don't have them even though they are
> legitimate. They usually don't have them because of the lack of good
> or full time IT staff.
Sell them service. I ususally offer to make their system fixed, i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jean-Paul Natola wrote:
I have a couple of homebrew ones which seem to work, although as soon as
I post them here they will become obsolete :-) They are not masschecked,
so use them with care.
http://fukka.co.uk/sa-rules/local/loans_rules.cf
C.
- --
I hope I'm not the first one who has though of this but suppose we
created a web site with material to educate the public on how not to get
ripped off from spam. The idea being that it is both simple and
comprehensive and targeted at educating the public.
The theory being that if the public is
Jean-Paul
If can put the full email on a web page (headers and all)...
I can run it over my system, and let you know which of many extra rules I
run hit...more than like some from www.rulesemporium.com/rules.htm
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842
I'm getting creamed here with the home owner crap
We don't care about your credit , yada yada yada
Any new rule out there for this yet?
Jean-Paul Natola
Network Administrator
Information Technology
Family Care International
588 Broadway Suite 503
New York, NY 10012
Phone:212-941-5300 xt
Wiebe Cazemier wrote:
>
> What exactly does the URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI rule mean? The description
> is:
>
> URI: CGI in .info TLD other than third-level "www"
>
> I get false positive spam which have URI's in the .info TLD in it.
> Like:
>
> http://foo.hello.info/forum/viewtopic.
Thursday 04 May 2006 14:42 skrev Wiebe Cazemier:
> Hi,
>
> What exactly does the URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI rule mean? The description is:
>
> URI: CGI in .info TLD other than third-level "www"
>
uri URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI /^(?:https?:\/\/)?[^\/]+(?http://"; or "https://"; followed by
[^\/]+
Are you a student, and interested in earning $4,500 for contributing to
open source, and fighting spam, over the course of the summer?
If so, get thee hence to the Google Summer of Code 2006 site, and propose
a project! http://code.google.com/soc/
We have a few prospective project mentors and a f
Timothy Burt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 May 2006, Matt Kettler wrote:
> >
> > 2) Since your rules are declared in user_prefs, have you declared
> > allow_user_rules in your local.cf?
>
> Curious that the answer to this is no. I saw this in the docs, after
> I had the user_prefs confirmed as working..
martin wrote:
> Dear all,
> spamd/spamc can had a user pref. file for user defined socring/white list
> etc,
> and using milter (spamass-milter) to control drop the spam mail or not.
> my question is, can drop the spam mail based on user pref. file? e.g. some
> user can decide to drop [marked]
Hi,
What exactly does the URI_NO_WWW_INFO_CGI rule mean? The description is:
URI: CGI in .info TLD other than third-level "www"
I get false positive spam which have URI's in the .info TLD in it. Like:
http://foo.hello.info/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1
Does this rule mean that the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Peter P. Benac wrote:
[snip]
>
> And your domain is my Mother's Maiden Name :)
>
> Regards,
> Pete
Remind me who you bank with? ;-)
C.
- --
Craig McLeanhttp://fukka.co.uk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Where the fun never starts
Power
On Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 7:50:41 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
> This is something Jeff had done a long time ago that was awesome. Right off
> the bat he saw the redirects being a problem, and got TinyURL to use SURBL.
Thanks Chris, but TBH, IIRC they used it without prompting from
us. Perhaps they
26 matches
Mail list logo
