Re: Alan Ralsky indicted

this article at freep.com http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080103/NEWS06/80103045/1008/NEWS06 Mich. spammer, 10 others indicted in alleged pump-and-dump scam {^_^}

Re: Spam content checker

Hi, Thanks for your reply. In my project I am going to send newsletters to our clients. Here I need to validate my newsletter(content) using some API(perl, php or python). Also I need to show the content's Spam score. On Jan 3, 2008 9:50 PM, John D. Hardin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On

Alan Ralsky indicted

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/04/0154229 Points to this article at freep.com http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080103/NEWS06/80103045/1008/NEWS06 Mich. spammer, 10 others indicted in alleged pump-and-dump scam {^_^}

Re: Botnet why?

> On 03.01.08 16:00, Dan Barker wrote: >> Why'd baddns hit? I'm confused. > >> 5.0 BOTNET Relay might be a spambot or >> virusbot >> [botnet0.8,ip=67.104.179.147,rdns=gadental.org,maildomain=gadental.org,baddn >> s] > >> dig mx gadental.org says: >> gadental.org.

Re: Botnet why?

On 03.01.08 16:00, Dan Barker wrote: > Why'd baddns hit? I'm confused. > 5.0 BOTNET Relay might be a spambot or virusbot > [botnet0.8,ip=67.104.179.147,rdns=gadental.org,maildomain=gadental.org,baddn > s] > dig mx gadental.org says: > gadental.org.86400 IN MX 10

RE: Botnet why?

>> -Original Message- >> From: Dan Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 4:00 PM >> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org >> Subject: Botnet why? >> >> Why'd baddns hit? I'm confused. >> >> Dan >> >> Report: >> >> Content analysis details: (5.9 points, 5.6 r

Botnet why?

Why'd baddns hit? I'm confused. Dan Report: Content analysis details: (5.9 points, 5.6 required) pts rule name description -- -- 5.0 BOTNET Relay might be a spambot or virusbot [botnet0.8,

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

Matthias Leisi wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Kettler wrote: Comparatively speaking, 6 might be inadequate. I don't know how much of that scale is really "necessary" for minimal operation, and how much is just needed for scalability against DDoS attacks.

Re: Spam content checker

At 08:20 AM 1/3/2008, John D. Hardin wrote: You're going to have to reword that question, and provide more details (like, what are you trying to do) before anyone will be able to provide a helpful answer. Best of luck. Looks like SG has asked about a dozen or so vague questions, people have a

Re: Spam content checker

On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Sg wrote: > Hi,, > > How to find score for content checker(validator) perl or php.? You're going to have to reword that question, and provide more details (like, what are you trying to do) before anyone will be able to provide a helpful answer. -- John Hardin KA7OHZ

Procmail/SA not moving mail into spam folder

Hi all, Wonder if you could help me, I'm trying to get my procmailrc to move all mail marked as spam into another folder - but it doesn't seem to work. I understand that this could be a procmail problem - but just wanted to confirm that maybe spamassassin was getting in the way? This is what my /

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Kettler wrote: > Comparatively speaking, 6 might be inadequate. I don't know how much of > that scale is really "necessary" for minimal operation, and how much is > just needed for scalability against DDoS attacks. dnswl.org runs on 10 servers

Spam content checker

Hi,, How to find score for content checker(validator) perl or php.? -- Sg

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

Per Jessen wrote: > Matt Kettler wrote: > > >>> What kind of bandwidth does it usually pull from servers when it is >>> part of the default distribution? >>> >>> I have 5 servers now at 3 locations and soon to add a 6th at a 4th >>> location. Is this enough? >>> >> For that, I have no clu

Re: Question about getting a blacklist included in SA

Matt Kettler wrote: >> What kind of bandwidth does it usually pull from servers when it is >> part of the default distribution? >> >> I have 5 servers now at 3 locations and soon to add a 6th at a 4th >> location. Is this enough? > > For that, I have no clue.. probably not a lot of bandwidth, but

Re: Spamassassin fallback to process owner.

Sven Juergensen (KielNET) wrote: > Hi list, > > i was posting this subject a while > ago and recently had some time to > look into it some more. > > Apparently, whenever $SOMETHING isn't > part of the envelope and/or body, > spamassassin falls back to the user > which is owning the process. Spamass