On Thu, May 28, 2009 16:11, hateSpam wrote:
>
> I got it thanks.
> Yes i am not whitelisted but in spamassassin I put the domain of all spams
> to be marked as spam like (*...@brabble.com) to mark all
> but spams are keep coming with different domain name.
used "block sender" in outlock express ?
On Thu, May 28, 2009 13:31, hateSpam wrote:
> Dear All, I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts
> and it is spam. Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about
> 6 every day.
add spf to your own domain, and test spf on your mta, begin with
softfails, and when its stable g
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 21:16 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> On 28/05/09 9:03 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
>
> > Incentive for you, to get em delisted from BRBL. The funky question is,
> > is BRBL part of your weighted blacklist metric?
>
> BRBL was and is in test mode for possible use again
On 28/05/09 9:03 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
> Incentive for you, to get em delisted from BRBL. The funky question is,
> is BRBL part of your weighted blacklist metric?
BRBL was and is in test mode for possible use against our whitelists.
Given the huge amount of bumph I've seen and heard
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 20:32 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> On 28/05/09 8:19 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
>
> >> Could be any of those. Why does it matter? Suspended IPs aren't on the
> >> list.
> >
> > Thus there's little or no incentive to get em delisted from blacklists,
> > no?
(That
On 28/05/09 8:19 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
>> Could be any of those. Why does it matter? Suspended IPs aren't on the
>> list.
>
> Thus there's little or no incentive to get em delisted from blacklists,
> no?
\I don't understand your question. Incentive to whom? The client? Of course
th
What follows is a non-weighted list of things we check, some hourly, some
daily, some quarterly, some on an ad hoc basis. Other stuff we check is
confidential, but we check a LOT more than this, sometimes regularly,
sometimes when our attention is drawn to a given issue.
SENDING ENTITY
Disclosure
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 18:06 -0600, J.D. Falk wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > > Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
> > Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to complaints pending
> > investigation, or forcefully suspended due to abuse and violati
On 28/05/09 8:06 PM, "J.D. Falk" wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
>>> Enabled = on the whitelist
>>> Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
>>> Disabled = removed from the client account
>>
>> Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to complaints pe
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
Enabled = on the whitelist
Suspended = removed from the whitelist, live in the client account
Disabled = removed from the client account
Suspended on request by the client, suspended due to complaints pending
investigation, or forcefully suspended due to abuse and vi
Speaking of red herrings ...
No, I do not believe that emailreg is particularly laughing, nor making
numerous trips to any bank. Yes, barracuda sponsors emailreg - and NOT the
other way around. As an aside, we have a few company "cuda cars" around here
(saves on rentals) but they're mostly
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 16:57 -0400, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> why does a company that is so easy to spam through get a -8 point pass?
>
> , RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8,
>
> its WAY too easy to spam through twitter, from every idiot with a
> twitter page.
http://www.dnswl.org/
Promote for a lower lis
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 15:52 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> On 28/05/09 3:09 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
>
> > I was merely arguing that not all blacklistings are necessarily bad,
> > just because they happen to be listed in SSC (or any other whitelist for
> > that matter), as I understood
Neil Schwartzman a écrit :
>
>
> On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, "Matt" wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
>> Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime "sa-update -D" will add it but
>> have yet to see it.
>
>
> I would like to add some perspective t
[Top-posting fixed]
On 28-May-2009, at 10:13, Dennis German wrote:
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Mittwoch 27 Mai 2009 LuKreme wrote
No, you are confused. This is common, lots of people are
confused about this. This is why many people think the name
needs to be changed to "Averaged Weigh
why does a company that is so easy to spam through get a -8 point pass?
, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8,
its WAY too easy to spam through twitter, from every idiot with a
twitter page.
belongs in the BRBL if you ask me.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[DKIM
Charles Gregory a écrit :
>
> Excuse if threading breaks, but I have to copy and paste from the
> archives. I'm not getting deliveries from the list (due to a bounce
> somehow disabling deliveries). Currently contacting list owner to
> resolve this odd issue. Well, at least I can still post :)
On 28/05/09 3:09 PM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
> I was merely arguing that not all blacklistings are necessarily bad,
> just because they happen to be listed in SSC (or any other whitelist for
> that matter), as I understood your post.
Re-reading what I wrote, I can't see where you got that i
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 14:12 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> On 28/05/09 11:39 AM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
> > Wait, I was /not/ justifying emailreg.org -- actually not even talking
> > about it, but the certification service SSC as a sole base to overrule
> > any other listing.
>
> I am no
On 28-May-2009, at 09:26, Sean Leinart wrote:
Yes. Barracuda is a scam.
Can you elaborate a bit? Thanks :0)
Barracuda is run by the same people that run emailreg.org which is a
$20/year subscription per domain to not be listed in Barracuda's
blacklist. Barracuda's policy seems to be to lis
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 09:43 -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
> I'm looking for domains to whitelist that meet this criteria:
Speaking of which, how would you like me to report bad listings in the
Hostkarma whitelist?
Typical fraud scam, Acai Berry, and Pills. Regarding some of them: It's
probably a saf
I would suggest that pay for play delisting fees, like those at
backscatterer.org, blur the line extremely between the spammers who
abuse us and the services that try to make money off legitimate
servers who follow RFCs. And too, what's to say that the spammers
themselves are intimately inv
On 28/05/09 10:42 AM, "Karsten Bräckelmann" wrote:
> Yes, every list does have occasional FPs. So your point about those 22
> listings is what exactly?
My point is the 409 false positives. Sorry if I was unclear or obtuse.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Security & Standards
Certifi
Karsten Bräckelmann rudersport.de> writes:
> On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 10:50 -0400, Kris Deugau wrote:
> > >
> > > For more info and the script's link see
> > > http://markmail.org/message/qqsm35q5bqpbb3in
> >
> > (For the lazy, the original hack is at
> > http://www.deepnet.cx/~kdeugau/spamtool
On 5/28/2009 6:40 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
On 5/28/2009 6:27 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
What do you need to make it survive? It works great for me.
I won't be involved at all.
It needs data, mirrors, zone, all what a RBL needs.
I'll do the mirrors - provide server - I ha
I'm looking for domains to whitelist that meet this criteria:
All email from the domain is 100% good
The FcRDNS matches the domain name
Example: *.wellsfargo.com
Silimarly I'd like domains for my yellow list. Yellow is mixed spam/hame
sources like yahoo, gmail, hotmail, etc.
Example: *.yahoo
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
On 5/28/2009 6:27 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
What do you need to make it survive? It works great for me.
I won't be involved at all.
It needs data, mirrors, zone, all what a RBL needs.
I'll do the mirrors - provide server - I have data - I don't have what
you are using
On 5/28/2009 6:27 PM, Marc Perkel wrote:
What do you need to make it survive? It works great for me.
I won't be involved at all.
It needs data, mirrors, zone, all what a RBL needs.
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
As you all know, on July 1st the emailbl.me test zone will go dark.
I helped Henrik
What do you need to make it survive? It works great for me.
Yet Another Ninja wrote:
As you all know, on July 1st the emailbl.me test zone will go dark.
I helped Henrik test the plugin and find mirrors for the data which
was being fed by feeds dedicated to this test only.
Would be nice to se
As you all know, on July 1st the emailbl.me test zone will go dark.
I helped Henrik test the plugin and find mirrors for the data which was
being fed by feeds dedicated to this test only.
Would be nice to see the concept/project/survive.
Maybe some of you can come up with something. I have no
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 08:59 -0700, an anonymous Nabble user wrote:
> I have never seen x-Spam header in the email.
Skimming through this thread, specifically reading your comments and
looking at the headers pasted...
Odds are, you have SA installed (according to some previous thread), but
it isn'
How 'bout a link from HEAT ( Heuristic Email Address Tracking )
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Mittwoch 27 Mai 2009 LuKreme wroteNo, you are confused. This is common, lots of people are confused
about this. This is why many people think the name needs to be
changed to "Averaged Weigh
hateSpam wrote:
I have spamassassin installed in my server but I have never had an email wht
[SPAM] in the subject. I get lots of spam. I think it is not checking
properly.
anybody know how to solve the problem please?
There are lots of different ways to use SA with your email. We can't
I have never seen x-Spam header in the email.
Yes it is on shared server.
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Email-from-myself-to-myself-tp23759955p23764717.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Do you see any x-Spam headers in the emails ?
Is this on a shared server (cPanel)?
hateSpam wrote:
I have spamassassin installed in my server but I have never had an email wht
[SPAM] in the subject. I get lots of spam. I think it is not checking
properly.
anybody know how to solve the probl
I have spamassassin installed in my server but I have never had an email wht
[SPAM] in the subject. I get lots of spam. I think it is not checking
properly.
anybody know how to solve the problem please?
John Hardin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
>
>> What is white_list and
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 11:10 -0400, Rob McEwen wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > We're not going down the path of judging blacklists based on whitelists
> > or certification services, or vice versa, do we?
>
> If the whitelist involves possibly questionable business practices
> (trying to res
Neil Schwartzman wrote:
-
Thank you for contacting Barracuda Networks regarding your issue. ...
There are a number of reasons your IP address may have been listed as
"poor", including:
...
8. In some rare cases, your recipients'
> -Original Message-
> From: LuKreme [mailto:krem...@kreme.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 11:19 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Barracuda Blacklist
>
>
> On 28 May 2009, at 07:35, Matt wrote:
>
> > Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the offic
On 28 May 2009, at 07:35, Matt wrote:
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official
checks by Spamassassin yet?
Yes. Barracuda is a scam.
I keep thinking sometime "sa-update -D" will add it but have yet to
see it.
And hopefully you never will.
I have only blacklist_from not any whitelist_from
John Hardin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
>
>> What is white_list and how can I check it. sorry about all these question
>> I
>> am new in Linux specially on server.
>
> The various whitelists (apart from AWL) add -100 poi
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 10:50 -0400, Kris Deugau wrote:
> Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > I use Kris Deugau's trim_whitelist -- though very infrequently, just
> > when I spot the DB gets out of hand. That hack seems to works perfectly
> > for me.
> >
> > For more info and the script's link see
> >
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> We're not going down the path of judging blacklists based on whitelists
> or certification services, or vice versa, do we?
>
If the whitelist involves possibly questionable business practices
(trying to reserve judgment here), then the information that Neil
provided
> On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, "Matt" wrote:
>
> > Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
> > Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime "sa-update -D" will add it but
> > have yet to see it.
On 28.05.09 09:47, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> Of interest is the verbiage Ba
Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
I use Kris Deugau's trim_whitelist -- though very infrequently, just
when I spot the DB gets out of hand. That hack seems to works perfectly
for me.
For more info and the script's link see
http://markmail.org/message/qqsm35q5bqpbb3in
(For the lazy, the original hac
On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
What is white_list and how can I check it. sorry about all these question I
am new in Linux specially on server.
The various whitelists (apart from AWL) add -100 points to messages they
match.
To check it, look in all of your local config files (typicall
On 28.05.09 07:11, hateSpam wrote:
> I got it thanks.
> Yes i am not whitelisted but in spamassassin I put the domain of all spams
> to be marked as spam like (*...@brabble.com) to mark all
> but spams are keep coming with different domain name.
That is what spammers do, They use any possible d
On Thu, 28 May 2009, Jim Knuth wrote:
am 28.05.2009 15:33 Uhr schrieb John Hardin :
On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is
spam. Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about 6 every day.
Did you happen to whitelist_f
On Thu, 2009-05-28 at 09:47 -0400, Neil Schwartzman wrote:
> I would like to add some perspective to potential use of the BRBL.
>
> Three weeks ago, I began requesting de-listings of any IP (active or
> suspended) on Certified that was listed on the Barracuda BRBL. When I
> started on April 29 the
Excuse if threading breaks, but I have to copy and paste from the
archives. I'm not getting deliveries from the list (due to a bounce
somehow disabling deliveries). Currently contacting list owner to
resolve this odd issue. Well, at least I can still post :)
mouss said:
Quick question: D
-Original Message-
From: hateSpam [mailto:khwaja_a...@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:11
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: Email from myself to myself
I got it thanks.
Yes i am not whitelisted but in spamassassin I put the domain of all spams
to be marked as sp
I got it thanks.
Yes i am not whitelisted but in spamassassin I put the domain of all spams
to be marked as spam like (*...@brabble.com) to mark all
but spams are keep coming with different domain name.
Thanks
hateSpam
Peter P. Benac wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: hateSpam [m
-Original Message-
From: hateSpam [mailto:khwaja_a...@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 09:48
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Email from myself to myself
What is white_list and how can I check it. sorry about all these question I
am new in Linux specially on server
What is white_list and how can I check it. sorry about all these question I
am new in Linux specially on server.
Thanks
hateSpam
John Hardin wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
>
>> I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is
>> spam. Is there any way t
On 28/05/09 9:35 AM, "Matt" wrote:
> Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
> Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime "sa-update -D" will add it but
> have yet to see it.
I would like to add some perspective to potential use of the BRBL.
Three weeks a
am 28.05.2009 15:33 Uhr schrieb John Hardin :
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
>
>> I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is
>> spam. Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about 6 every day.
>
> Did you happen to whitelist_from your own domain?
>
I th
Is there a reason the Barracuda blacklist is not in the official checks by
Spamassassin yet? I keep thinking sometime "sa-update -D" will add it but
have yet to see it.
Matt
On Thu, 28 May 2009, hateSpam wrote:
I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is
spam. Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about 6 every day.
Did you happen to whitelist_from your own domain?
--
John Hardin KA7OHZhttp://www.impsec.org/~j
thus RW spake:
On Thu, 28 May 2009 05:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
hateSpam wrote:
Thanks for reply.
i) How can I check ( open relay ) in postfix. I looked at but could
not find.
When you say "from myself to my self" it sounds like simple address
spoofing which spammers do all the time. It doesn't imp
On Thu, 28 May 2009 05:37:28 -0700 (PDT)
hateSpam wrote:
>
> Thanks for reply.
>
> i) How can I check ( open relay ) in postfix. I looked at but could
> not find.
When you say "from myself to my self" it sounds like simple address
spoofing which spammers do all the time. It doesn't imply an op
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
thus hateSpam spake:
| Thanks for reply.
|
| i) How can I check ( open relay ) in postfix. I looked at but could not
| find.
Check if your server accepts to relay mail from outside your network (or
whatever you configured it to) or unauthenticated us
Thanks for reply.
i) How can I check ( open relay ) in postfix. I looked at but could not
find.
ii) When I check the header all information is about our server. I can not
see any external server.
the header is some thing like bellow:
From: myn...@example.com
Subject: RE: 28.5.2009 ID
> On Mittwoch 27 Mai 2009 LuKreme wrote:
> > No, you are confused. This is common, lots of people are confused
> > about this. This is why many people think the name needs to be
> > changed to "Averaged Weight List" or something similar.
On 28.05.09 12:06, Michael Monnerie wrote:
> The name is
From: Linda Walsh
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:28:35 -0700
Jeff Mincy wrote:
>From: Linda Walsh
>Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:48:43 -0700
>
>Bowie Bailey wrote: >
>At face value, this seems very counter productive.
>
> You still aren't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
thus hateSpam spake:
| Dear All,
| I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is
spam.
| Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about 6 every day.
|
| My OS Centos 5
| for mail delivery Postfix , Procmail and spamassassin
Dear All,
I am getting email from myself to my self all Pills adverts and it is spam.
Is there any way to solve the problem. I get about 6 every day.
My OS Centos 5
for mail delivery Postfix , Procmail and spamassassin latest version
I appreciate you help.
Thanks in advance
hateSpam
--
View t
http://zmi.at/x/ripdefang-dbmail
I just released this very first version of a "un-defang" tool. It's for
everybody who has defanged spams and wants to get the original spam back
into the mail system again.
Usage is very simple: Take a spam that is defanged by amavis, and resend
or forward it t
On Samstag 23 Mai 2009 Chris wrote:
> EmailB
Of 71 messages where EMAILBL hit, 3 were still marked ham but really
spam (points: 2.0, 3.0, 3.1), no FPs. One message was just pushed over
5.0 by EMAILBL and would have been a FN otherwise.
So it helps here. We have a very hard setup and only few sp
Chris,
> > AFAIK though it isn't possible to place a cap on the FuzzyOCR score. I
> > don't want to, but I detune it purely to reduce the likelyhood of
> > something hitting my discard threshold by OCR alone.
>
> If you consider this feature so important, then I could implement a
> max_score feat
On Mittwoch 27 Mai 2009 LuKreme wrote:
> No, you are confused. This is common, lots of people are confused
> about this. This is why many people think the name needs to be
> changed to "Averaged Weight List" or something similar.
The name is really a mess. Even if you'd call it "Averaged Weigh
RW wrote:
AFAIK though it isn't possible to place a cap on the FuzzyOCR score. I
don't want to, but I detune it purely to reduce the likelyhood of
something hitting my discard threshold by OCR alone.
If you consider this feature so important, then I could implement a
max_score feature that
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 05:10, Warren Togami wrote:
> On 04/14/2009 07:21 AM, Mark Martinec wrote:
>>
>> I agree it's about time to get 3.3.0 wrapped up. There is some useful new
>> code there along with a couple of bug fixes, just sitting there. People
>> are
>> reluctant to use a non-released ve
72 matches
Mail list logo
