On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 16:06 -0500, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> > > ok_languages en
> > >
> > > and textcat enabled (loadplugin) but it is not, say, scoring Spanish spam.
TextCat might just not identify the language with sufficient confidence.
On 2/25/2011 4:06 PM, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
>> On 2/25/2011 3:49 PM, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
>>> Butting in, we have
>>>
>>> ok_languages en
>>>
>>> and textcat enabled (loadplugin) but it is not, say, scoring Spanish spam.
>>>
>>> Now
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
> On 2/25/2011 3:49 PM, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
>>
>> Butting in, we have
>>
>> ok_languages en
>>
>> and textcat enabled (loadplugin) but it is not, say, scoring Spanish spam.
>>
>> Now, is it ok to have both the loadplugin and the ok_lan
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 21:55:12 +0100
Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> Incorrect. You must have abuse@addresses iat your domain registration
> boundary, if you can receive e-mail.
> http://www.rfc-ignorant.org/policy-abuse.php
That quotes RFC 2142, which is only a proposed standard. rfc-ignorant.o
On 2/25/2011 3:49 PM, Mauricio Tavares wrote:
>
> Butting in, we have
>
> ok_languages en
>
> and textcat enabled (loadplugin) but it is not, say, scoring Spanish spam.
>
> Now, is it ok to have both the loadplugin and the ok_languages
> statements in local.cf?
Loadplugin statements should b
> Hello Mahmoud Khonji,
>
> Am 2011-02-23 23:03:46, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> > A sending mail server should accept ab...@example.com, and number of
On 24.02.11 21:01, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> This is wrong because, only public ISP offering MAILSERVICES must have
> an addresses. The
On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:44 AM, James Lay wrote:
>
>
> On 2/25/11 6:32 AM, "Giles Coochey" wrote:
>
>>On 25/02/2011 14:31, Giles Coochey wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2011 14:18, James Lay wrote:
Hi folks,
SoŠI was sent an email that was pretty much all in ChineseŠheaders
below:
>
On Friday 25 February 2011 10:29:08 Ned Slider wrote:
> > 3.3 RCVD_IN_PBLRBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
> >
> > [78.55.199.104 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
>
> That looks to be your main problem right there - don't deep parse
> Received hea
On 02/23/2011 07:17 PM, Alex wrote:
> I'm wondering what people's opinion is on domains like
> verticalresponse.com and vresp.com, and others, that seem to
> distribute mail to anyone who wants to spend the money to buy a list
> from them. Constantcontact might be in this same business, but it
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:57:39 +
Martin Gregorie wrote:
> However, the thing I hadn't seen before is that its IP, 208.115.216.98
> resolves to 98-216-115-208.static.reverse.lstn.net
> So, is this a normal, expected reverse DNS result that I just haven't
> seen before or is it intended to trick
On 2/25/11 6:32 AM, "Giles Coochey" wrote:
>On 25/02/2011 14:31, Giles Coochey wrote:
>> On 25/02/2011 14:18, James Lay wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> SoI was sent an email that was pretty much all in Chineseheaders
>>> below:
>>>
>>> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:44:37 -0700
>>> Subject:
>>> =?ut
On 25/02/2011 14:31, Giles Coochey wrote:
On 25/02/2011 14:18, James Lay wrote:
Hi folks,
So…I was sent an email that was pretty much all in Chinese…headers
below:
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:44:37 -0700
Subject:
=?utf-8?B?Rlc6IOKWoO+8keaciOOBq+W8iuekvuOBq+WxiuOBhOOBn+aEnw==?=
=?utf-8?B?6Kyd
On 25/02/2011 14:18, James Lay wrote:
Hi folks,
So…I was sent an email that was pretty much all in Chinese…headers below:
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:44:37 -0700
Subject: =?utf-8?B?Rlc6IOKWoO+8keaciOOBq+W8iuekvuOBq+WxiuOBhOOBn+aEnw==?=
=?utf-8?B?6Kyd44Gu5aOw44KS5YWs6ZaL44GX44Gf44GE44Go5oCd44GE44G
On Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:59:44 +0100
"Stefan Jakobs" wrote:
>
> Hi list,
>
> I received a message from a friend, fetched the message by using POP3
> and passed it to spamassassin. It marked the message as spam.
> I know this is not the intended use of spamassassin,
Actually it's fine to use SA
Hi folks,
SoI was sent an email that was pretty much all in Chineseheaders below:
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 13:44:37 -0700
Subject: =?utf-8?B?Rlc6IOKWoO+8keaciOOBq+W8iuekvuOBq+WxiuOBhOOBn+aEnw==?=
=?utf-8?B?6Kyd44Gu5aOw44KS5YWs6ZaL44GX44Gf44GE44Go5oCd44GE44G+44GZ44CC?=
Thread-Topic:
=?utf-8?B?4p
I was just dissecting a piece of clothing store spam that was posted to
a technical mailing list I'm a member of. It turned out to be the usual
Chinese shop spammer, registered with ename.com in China and with all
contact details routed through hotmail.
However, the thing I hadn't seen before is t
On 25/02/11 08:59, Stefan Jakobs wrote:
Hi list,
I received a message from a friend, fetched the message by using POP3 and
passed it to spamassassin. It marked the message as spam.
I know this is not the intended use of spamassassin, but is there any chance
that I can circumvent this kind of fa
Hi list,
I received a message from a friend, fetched the message by using POP3 and
passed it to spamassassin. It marked the message as spam.
I know this is not the intended use of spamassassin, but is there any chance
that I can circumvent this kind of false positives?
Here are the headers:
Re
On 24/02/2011 21:30, Dominic Benson wrote:
On 24 Feb 2011, at 20:01, Michelle Konzack wrote:
Hello Mahmoud Khonji,
Am 2011-02-23 23:03:46, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
A sending mail server should accept ab...@example.com, and number of
This is wrong because, only public ISP offering MAIL
19 matches
Mail list logo
