Christopher Martin wrote:
The convention of assuming that the non country coded domains are US domains
is simply a result of American hubris.
Your statement is simply the result of historical ignorance on your part.
The fact is, non-country coded domains were created when the internet
was st
On Mon, October 16, 2006 05:23, Billy Huddleston wrote:
> Won't work for my use.. Running SA for ISP.. Way too many people.. Way too
> much volume.. People upset at the time delays already.. which ar under 2 -
> 10 minutes.. Go Figure.
same people use upto 2 - 10 minutes to delete spam, Go Figu
On Mon, October 16, 2006 00:16, Brian S. Meehan wrote:
> It appears that my email address is now being used as a from address in
> many spam emails to many addresses. Over the past week, I have gotten 150+
> "postmaster: mail delivery failure" -each day-.
is it with enveloppe from [EMAIL PROTECTE
Christopher Martin wrote:
And, lastly, as much as US citizens hate to hear it, .org is NOT a US
domain, .org.us is. The .com, .org, etc domains are international domains.
The convention of assuming that the non country coded domains are US domains
is simply a result of American hubris. It would a
* On 15/10/06 21:11 -0800, John Andersen wrote:
| On Sunday 15 October 2006 19:08, John Thompson wrote:
|
| > If you have 3.1.5 working well I wouldn't bother. Besides, 3.1.7 is out
| > already to address some 3.1.6 "oops" issues, but it hasn't made it into
| > the FreeBSD ports tree yet.
|
| Wh
Really, the idea that a US courts can order an international organisation,
like InterNIC (that's the Inter- bit of InterNIC), to deregister a domain is
farcical. The only pressure the US courts can place on InterNIC is "Do what
we say or you get shut down". Well, go ahead. Somehow I think that the
On Sunday 15 October 2006 19:08, John Thompson wrote:
> If you have 3.1.5 working well I wouldn't bother. Besides, 3.1.7 is out
> already to address some 3.1.6 "oops" issues, but it hasn't made it into
> the FreeBSD ports tree yet.
Why does it have to be in the ports tree? Does the CPAN version
On 2006-10-15, Steve Lake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, this sounds spectacular. One question. Is there a port on
> Freebsd for this? I don't see one offhand. If there is, then that would
> assume that all the other necessary ports are present as well. If not,
> it'll be a roya
On 2006-10-15, Steve Lake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just looked over the bug fix list for 3.1.6 and it doesn't seem
> like anything *major* that would suggest that I should make the leap. I'm
> right now running 3.1.5 on my box. Is there other improvements, such as
> rules and the
Not much you can do about it other than find a shotgun, go find the
owner of the botnet sending the spam and the spammer generating them,
and shot the both of them in the groin. (That is to say, I know how
frustrating being on the incoming for a joejob can be. You could
also send email to the post
Won't work for my use.. Running SA for ISP.. Way too many people.. Way too
much volume.. People upset at the time delays already.. which ar under 2 -
10 minutes.. Go Figure.
- Original Message -
From: "John Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 10:59 PM
S
On 2006-10-15, Michael Scheidell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Billy Huddleston wrote:
>>
>> Someone want to explain Greylisting?
> It delays any email for up to 45 mins.
> If the sender is running a REAL server[sic] like aol or yahoo, it will
> retry it.
>
> Ok if you don't mind waiting a log ti
It appears that my email address is now being used as a from address in
many spam emails to many addresses. Over the past week, I have gotten 150+
"postmaster: mail delivery failure" -each day-.
Does anyone have suggestions on how to handle this? They're all
semi-standard 'delivery failure' or 'co
As beta it works very well. No crashes etc. It needs fine tuning to
make it more effective, though.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Steve Lake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Oh, beta. Hmm, I guess I'm going to have to hold off on
installing it then. I can't risk putting betas on a pr
Hi, I got a problem with a lot spam coming thru and it
looks like the main reason is that AWL is on every test and when that is
no there it give the e-mail negative points. How can I turn of AWL?And if I turn it off will effect domain and users on my list that I have
that are whitelisted?Payne-
On Tue, 2006-10-10 at 23:25 -0700, John Rudd wrote:
> Jason Haar wrote:
> > I've been waiting for anyone else to bring it up - but no-one has.
> >
> > If Spamhaus lose this lawsuit (which they are ignoring as they are
> > UK-based and this is some judge in Chicago), they may very well lose
> > the
Oh, beta. Hmm, I guess I'm going to have to hold off on
installing it then. I can't risk putting betas on a production server,
even if it is a small one. Do you know if they'll make an announcement
about it when it's released?
At 11:25 PM 10/14/2006 -0700, jdow wrote:
It's a few li
Ok, well I only see 3.1.6 on the site. Not unless I'm looking in
the wrong place.
At 11:26 PM 10/14/2006 -0700, jdow wrote:
3.1.7. Skip 6.
{^_^}
- Original Message - From: "Steve Lake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 20:14
Subject: Should I upgrade to
On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, Michael Fenimore wrote:
Hi. I hope this question isn't beyond the scope of this group or hasn't
been answered already.
I maintain a site that runs Majordomo v. 1.94.5. We have over 55 groups
and close to 4800 members.
Some of these groups have been in existence for a while a
On Sunday 15 October 2006 21:38, jdow took the opportunity to say:
> From: "Magnus Holmgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On Sunday 15 October 2006 16:55, Magnus Holmgren took the opportunity to
say:
> > Indeed, when I did "spamassassin -D bayes < testmessage" the debug output
> > reported learning fro
On Sunday, October 15, 2006, 5:21:38 PM, R Lists06 wrote:
>> Blame the plaintiffs, blame what some might consider to be
>> less-than-stellar legal advice given Spamhaus, but don't blame the
>> court for following the law.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Robert Braver
RL> Why blame the plaintiffs?
>
> Someone want to explain Greylisting?
Here is an example that references a coupla websites
http://qmail.jms1.net/scripts/jgreylist.shtml
- rh
--
Robert - Abba Communications
Computer & Internet Services
(509) 624-7159 - www.abbacomm.net
>
> Blame the plaintiffs, blame what some might consider to be
> less-than-stellar legal advice given Spamhaus, but don't blame the
> court for following the law.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Robert Braver
Why blame the plaintiffs?
Fortunately or unfortunately as the case may be, law is subject to
On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 09:23 -0400, Coffey, Neal wrote:
> [snip]
> SpamHaus took on more responsibility than they'd like to admit.
> Unfortunately, this bit of the story isn't widely reported. Here's the
> best reference I could find, from the blog of an Illinois lawyer:
>
> http://blogs.securite
From: "Michael Scheidell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Billy Huddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Someone want to explain Greylisting?
It delays any email for up to 45 mins.
If the sender is running a REAL server[sic] like aol or yahoo, it will
retry it.
Ok if you don't mind waiting a log time f
(Long answer in email sent direct.)
Short answer - SARE. Check the "Other Rules" in the side bar. Fred's
rules are generally useful. And Jennifer's are timeless and useful.
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What I meant to say is that, eventhough they do
Suhas (QualiSpace) wrote:
Hello,
Which rule will help me in checking if senders domain has MX
record or not. E.g I am getting email from [EMAIL PROTECTED], then the rule
should check whether domain.com has an MX record or not.
Fix your DNS:
# host -t mx domain.com
domain.co
Title: Message
Majordomo uses aliases in the /etc/alias
file that matches a list of members.
Some of these lists have 100s of email
addresses.
So to answer your
question, yes.
Local users being those
that are users on the network and have FQDN email addresses to this machine.
Aliased n
>>Hi. I hope this question isn't beyond the scope of this group or hasn't been
>>answered already.
>>I maintain a site that runs Majordomo v. 1.94.5. We have over 55 groups and
>>close to 4800 members.
>>Some of these groups have been in existence for a while and have found
>>themselves in spamm
Title: Message
'scan'
aliases? what do you mean?
is
what you meant to say is that spamd only scans LOCAL users and that email to an
alias that is NOT LOCAL DESTINATION is not run through SA?
> -Original Message-
> From: Billy Huddleston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 3:58 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: How to filter these spam messages
>
>
> Someone want to explain Greylisting?
It delays any email for up to 45 mins.
If the
What I meant to say is that, eventhough they do get filtered, these spam messages
do not get scored high enough to offset threshold so they get marked as spam. I
will check on greylisting, but what I was really hoping for is a ruleset which helps
score these high enough so they are marked a
Hi. I hope this question isn’t beyond the scope of
this group or hasn’t been answered already.
I maintain a site that runs Majordomo v. 1.94.5. We have
over 55 groups and close to 4800 members.
Some of these groups have been in existence for a while and have
found themselves in spammer da
Google for it. LOTS OF information lives out there to find.
- Original Message -
From: "Billy Huddleston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 12:58
Subject: Re: How to filter these spam messages
Someone want to explain Greylisting?
- Original Message -
Fr
From: "Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello,
I'm trying to figure out what to do to filter these spam messages. I can't seem
to
find a ruleset which would filter them. Perhaps I need to change something in
my configuration? any help would be appreciated, thanks!
Here are the latest spam I'm rec
Someone want to explain Greylisting?
- Original Message -
From: "Micke Andersson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 3:50 PM
Subject: Re: How to filter these spam messages
Try Greylisting if you are admin on your own e-mail server!
Try Greylisting if you are admin on your own e-mail server!
That will filter most of those e-mails.
/Micke
Simon wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to figure out what to do to filter these spam messages. I can't seem
to
find a ruleset which would filter them. Perhaps I need to change something in
my co
From: "Scott Friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Has anyone figured a good recipe for blocking these type of spam yet?
I get 3-5 per day to each user on my mail server.
Thanks
Original Message
Subject: Re: Work has been closed permanently
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:28:50 +0600
Fr
From: "Magnus Holmgren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Sunday 15 October 2006 16:55, Magnus Holmgren took the opportunity to say:
Indeed, when I did "spamassassin -D bayes < testmessage" the debug output
reported learning from a different "@sa_generated" message ID
than "sa-learn -D bayes --forget" said
Yea, I was getting ready to post about the same kind of spam.. Very
obnoxious. Anyone ideas?
- Original Message -
From: "Simon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 2:29 PM
Subject: How to filter these spam messages
Hello,
I'm trying to figure out what to do to f
Scott Friedman wrote:
Has anyone figured a good recipe for blocking these type of spam yet?
I get 3-5 per day to each user on my mail server.
Thanks
Original Message
Subject: Re: Work has been closed permanently
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:28:50 +0600
From: Leslie
Has anyone figured a good recipe for blocking these type of spam yet?
I get 3-5 per day to each user on my mail server.
Thanks
Original Message
Subject:Re: Work has been closed permanently
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:28:50 +0600
From: Leslie Hilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sunday 15 October 2006 16:55, Magnus Holmgren took the opportunity to say:
> Indeed, when I did "spamassassin -D bayes < testmessage" the debug output
> reported learning from a different "@sa_generated" message ID
> than "sa-learn -D bayes --forget" said it was trying to forget (but didn't
> fi
I have adopted the following policy, I run commercial free email. If it
is unsolicited
it gets blacklisted. If they want to run commercials through my email
site, I will let them,
provided they use a mailing list and the user can opt out. Random,
unsolicited emails
go in the blacklist. This
Hello,
I'm trying to figure out what to do to filter these spam messages. I can't seem
to
find a ruleset which would filter them. Perhaps I need to change something in
my configuration? any help would be appreciated, thanks!
Here are the latest spam I'm receiving:
http://optinet.com/spam.txt
On Wednesday, October 11, 2006, 1:16:18 AM, hamann.w wrote:
hwtod> As a non-american, I can see this as a "vote with your feet"
hwtod> case stop buying US products
I'm squarely on the side of Spamhaus and sensitive to these issues,
as I myself have been sued by a ROKSO-listed spa^H^H^H
elect
I got a couple of words at grey level 60-70
gocr -d 2 -l 60 k.gif
_ _ _ _
' '' \code(01d0).h\_ _ L_,^_ _,__'_ h
__rrdcms osEsrn a \ _ \
_ 5uppN_Es dppErIm uRE _0 Dr_E* pRDo_cr
_ l OOW ff*Tu_dL _No Um
_ PuRE, UnnocEssED pRoDun _ ffo FrcLERs
_ PRomTEs s*rE, _p7D rRr rw
On Wed, 2006-10-11 at 06:16 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> quite frankly: mis-listings occur but if a domain remains blacklisted
> after a court case, it
> must be for a reason :)
> As an email user, I dont want to have to find out that reason :(
> As a non-american, I can see
On Sunday 15 October 2006 04:10, Matthias Haegele wrote:
> Chris Purves schrieb:
> > I definitely recommend that you upgrade your spamassassin. The version
> > currently in volatile is 3.1.5. I can't comment as to the differences
>
> ^
> it seems that currently "only
Steve Lake wrote:
> Oh, this sounds spectacular. One question. Is there a port
> on Freebsd for this? I don't see one offhand. If there is, then
> that would assume that all the other necessary ports are present as
> well. If not, it'll be a royal b trying to get the nix versions
Has anyone figured a good recipe for blocking these type of spam yet?
I get 3-5 per day to each user on my mail server.
Thanks
Original Message
Subject:Re: Work has been closed permanently
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 21:28:50 +0600
From: Leslie Hilton <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Sun, October 15, 2006 12:11, Spamassassin List wrote:
> gocr -d 2 -l 90 k.gif
try
gocr -d 2 -l 85 k.gif
now DIET commes :-)
> D_o nor clIck,)usrrype In your browser hnp ((hoper_ ner
or add some words from there
--
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails."
I'm worried. Whenever I feed a message with "autolearn=spam"
or "autolearn=ham" to sa-learn --forget, I get "Forgot tokens from 0
message(s) (1 message(s) examined)" back. That's bad, because it means that
the net effect of re-learning a spam incorrectly learnt as ham is one spam
occurrence and
Chris Purves schrieb:
On October 13, 2006 06:42 am, Bart Veltman wrote:
Currently I am using spamassassin version 3.0.3 on a Debian 3.1 sarge
(stable release) linux system. According to Debian this version is
stable but is more than a year old. Which version should I use, or must
I use, to main
54 matches
Mail list logo
