On 5/11/2011 10:58 PM, Niamh Holding wrote:
Hello Ted,
Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 10:21:23 PM, you wrote:
TM> Yes, your Honor. (eyeroll)
Any intention to produce it in support of your claim?
Your welcome to my exclusion list if you want it, I'm not
going to post it here but anyone who want
Hello Ted,
Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 10:21:23 PM, you wrote:
TM> Yes, your Honor. (eyeroll)
Any intention to produce it in support of your claim?
--
Best regards,
Niamhmailto:ni...@fullbore.co.uk
pgpxzoGYpki8k.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On 05/11, Adam Katz wrote:
> Long tail there; the sum of all of your items was 56.5%. Even if you
> truncated those numbers, it doesn't add up (56.5 + 19 * 0.1% = 58.4%).
Yup, sorry I wasn't clear, those were just the top, not the entire list.
> I'm not sure how much of my company's data I can
On 05/11/2011 04:35 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> if someone sends an email to 175 people, once they hit 'x' number in the
> first email attempt, we send '4xx too many emails'
> ie:
> ehlo *.yahoo.com
> mail from:
> rcpt to:
> 250 ok
> rcpt to:
> 250 ok
> [skip to 100].
> rcpt to:
> 4xx too
On 05/11/2011 04:19 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> I bet it's largely related to the fact that yahoo is apparently the only
> freemail provider that doesn't require you to have a previously existing
> email address.
Yahoo does not require an existing address.
Hotmail/MSN/Live does not require
On 05/11/2011 01:01 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/dnswlabusehistory.svg
Too bad FF doesn't let me zoom on an svg; had to hit F11 to see it.
> Percentage of total spam from legitimate email providers in April as
> reported as abuse to dnswl.org:
>
> 35.5% ya
On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 23:26 -0700, snowweb wrote:
> I'm getting many spams in the last few days, with spam scores far above my
> 4.0 threshold, which are still being delivered. Wondering if it's to do with
> the fact that they all seem to have no sender.
Uhm, wait -- what else did you expect!?
So
On Wed, 11 May 2011 14:21:23 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> We have been using greylist-milter for years and all Yahoo's
> IP ranges are listed in the exception list, even the ones that they
> don't publish and you can only find by issuing a whois against the
> RIR database.
We've been using o
On Wed, 11 May 2011 16:51:58 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> ie: qmail, postfix, exchange, sendmail, all (can) send a 4xx after
> rcpt to.
Indeed.
> because thats what the RFC's say.
Note: I said "badly-written SMTP software", not "software that adheres
to the RFCs".
In the real world, 4xx a
On 05/11/2011 01:19 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
> I bet it's largely related to the fact that yahoo is apparently the
> only freemail provider that doesn't require you to have a previously
> existing email address.
I just created a test @live.com (hotmail) account without an
existing address
On 5/11/2011 1:14 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 13:10:31 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Yahoo's SMTP mailers are unable to handle a standard
SMTP error 4xx, if they get one they abort the
transmission and return the message to the sender
Do you have evidence to back up that cl
On 5/11/11 4:49 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
Ah, ok. We avoid issuing 4xx in response to a "RCPT" command because
quite a lot of badly-written SMTP software doesn't handle that well.
ie: qmail, postfix, exchange, sendmail, all (can) send a 4xx after rcpt to.
because thats what the RFC's say.
On Wed, 11 May 2011 16:35:50 -0400
Michael Scheidell wrote:
> if someone sends an email to 175 people, once they hit 'x' number in
> the first email attempt, we send '4xx too many emails'
Ah, ok. We avoid issuing 4xx in response to a "RCPT" command because
quite a lot of badly-written SMTP soft
On 5/11/11 4:14 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
Do you have evidence to back up that claim? I don't believe
it's true. We use greylisting and Yahoo's servers don't seem
to have problems with it.
what I have observed; (no, we don't greylist)
but, we do keep a cluster of 4 mx servers per client. eac
I bet it's largely related to the fact that yahoo is apparently the only
freemail provider that doesn't require you to have a previously existing
email address.
I also suspect that, for this reason, google.com would send less spam
if they didn't allow yahoo addresses as the pre-existing address.
On 5/11/11 4:01 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/dnswlabusehistory.svg
Percentage of total spam from legitimate email providers in April as
reported as abuse to dnswl.org:
what is funny, is you said 'yahoo' and 'legit provider' all on one
subject line :-)
I t
On Wed, 11 May 2011 13:10:31 -0700
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Yahoo's SMTP mailers are unable to handle a standard
> SMTP error 4xx, if they get one they abort the
> transmission and return the message to the sender
Do you have evidence to back up that claim? I don't believe
it's true. We use g
On 11/05/2011 4:01 PM, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/dnswlabusehistory.svg
Percentage of total spam from legitimate email providers in April as
reported as abuse to dnswl.org:
35.5% yahoo.com
6.4% google.com
2.9% tp.pl
2.3% tin.it
1.8% messagelabs.com
this is no surprise
Yahoo's SMTP mailers are unable to handle a standard
SMTP error 4xx, if they get one they abort the
transmission and return the message to the sender
Thus any commercial ISP that wants to retain customers
must exempt all of Yahoo's IP address ranges from
any greylisting filte
http://www.chaosreigns.com/dnswl/dnswlabusehistory.svg
Percentage of total spam from legitimate email providers in April as
reported as abuse to dnswl.org:
35.5% yahoo.com
6.4% google.com
2.9% tp.pl
2.3% tin.it
1.8% messagelabs.com
1.4% hotmail.com
1.1% postini.com
1.0% orange.fr
1.0% aol
Add "on YouTube" and Bob's your uncle.
But it is a tad contrived.
{^_-}
On 2011/05/11 03:58, Mynabbler wrote:
jdow wrote:
header __MN_IWCAPSubject =~ /[a-z][A-Z][a-z]/
Help! My iPad does not work on FaceBook.
Bet that hits it as a subject.
Nope. Matches only two times..., on the
jdow wrote:
>
>>> header __MN_IWCAPSubject =~ /[a-z][A-Z][a-z]/
> Help! My iPad does not work on FaceBook.
> Bet that hits it as a subject.
>
Nope. Matches only two times..., on the P from iPad and the B from FaceBook.
It does not match the F.
Getting back to the matter at hand: is some
Help! My iPad does not work on FaceBook.
Bet that hits it as a subject.
{^_-}
On 2011/05/10 06:01, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 5/10/2011 7:59 AM, Mynabbler wrote:
Mynabbler wrote:
Does someone have a rule for interword capitalization?
Unfortunately no takers for the question. I came up with th
On 10.05.11 23:26, snowweb wrote:
> I'm getting many spams in the last few days, with spam scores far above my
> 4.0 threshold, which are still being delivered.
delivered? SA doesn't care about delivery, only about detecting spam.
The delivery is up to your MTA, e.g. spamass-milter
> X-Spam-Check
24 matches
Mail list logo
