Thanks, John. I'm teaching spamassassin now!
--pat--
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Pat Traynor wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, John Hardin wrote:
Take a look under http://www.impsec.org/antispam/ for some scripting for
user-directed training in that sort of envir
Randy Ramsdell wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Kris Deugau wrote:
DNSBLs are pretty much useless, since the message *was* legitimately
relayed in from Hotmail.
A couple of times I've seen enough examples with similar enough URLs
to create a uri rule something like:
uri MISC_
John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Kris Deugau wrote:
DNSBLs are pretty much useless, since the message *was* legitimately
relayed in from Hotmail.
A couple of times I've seen enough examples with similar enough URLs
to create a uri rule something like:
uri MISC_INFOm|https?://rita
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Kris Deugau wrote:
DNSBLs are pretty much useless, since the message *was* legitimately
relayed in from Hotmail.
A couple of times I've seen enough examples with similar enough URLs to
create a uri rule something like:
uri MISC_INFO m|https?://rita..sa..ly\.info/?$|
b
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Pat Traynor wrote:
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, John Hardin wrote:
Take a look under http://www.impsec.org/antispam/ for some scripting for
user-directed training in that sort of environment. Each user needs a
SpamAssassin-HAM and SpamAssassin-SPAM folder.
Thanks for the reply!
Anyone else seeing anything like this:
http://www.deepnet.cx/~kdeugau/hotmail-spam.eml
slipping through?
Bayes is about the only thing I see getting any kind of ongoing handle
on these (and that, BAYES_60 is a reason to celebrate) - the only
content worth matching with more static rules is th
I do this by piping messages (either singly or in muliples) to
spamassassin -r or -k as appropriate.
You may need to enable the ability to use unix pipes, which can be
done within the pine setup, or by adding the "enable-unix-pipe-cmd" in
the feature-list section of your .pinerc.
On Wed, 3 Nov 2
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, John Hardin wrote:
Take a look under http://www.impsec.org/antispam/ for some scripting for
user-directed training in that sort of environment. Each user needs a
SpamAssassin-HAM and SpamAssassin-SPAM folder.
Thanks for the reply!
I'm getting a "not found" at that address
On Wed, 3 Nov 2010, Pat Traynor wrote:
I've been running Spamassassin on my linux server for some time, and I
use Pine to read my mail.
Hello, fellow fossil!
I suspect that Spamassassin isn't learning from spam that's coming
through if I don't alert it to false positives or missed spam, but
This is certainly a newbie question for all of you out there, but I
really don't know where I should be asking this.
I've been running Spamassassin on my linux server for some time, and I
use Pine to read my mail. I suspect that Spamassassin isn't learning
from spam that's coming through if I do
On 2010/11/03 8:05 AM, haman...@t-online.de wrote:
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
It's the only purpose of the Reply-To header to be different from To: -
otherwise it can be omitted anyways.
What did I miss?
Hi Bernd, although I have seen scenarios using the feature, they never involved
both addresses
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
It's the only purpose of the Reply-To header to be different from To: -
otherwise it can be omitted anyways.
What did I miss?
Hi Bernd, although I have seen scenarios using the feature, they never involved
both addresses as free mail accounts.
So a meta combined with freem
On Die, 2010-11-02 at 18:31 -0230, Lawrence @ Rogers wrote:
> As a sort of follow up to my last message, I was wondering how
> complicated it is to write a rule that would compare the From: and
> Reply-To: headers, and set it to 0.001 or make it a meta rule that could
> be used in conjunction w
13 matches
Mail list logo
