>>> On 11/11/2012 at 1:52 PM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-11-11 at 10:38 -0500, Joseph Acquisto wrote:
>
>> RBL checks were seen, after I removed the -L from /etc/sysconfig/spamd.cf,
> but have
>> since stopped. I don't know when it stopped.
>>
> Its probably worth running a piece of
>>> On 11/11/2012 at 3:53 PM, RW wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:38:08 -0500
> Joseph Acquisto wrote:
>
>> One thing I don't understand is why I no longer see RBL's showing as
>> being checked. I'd think these folks should show up on at least one.
>
> Hard to say, I see that once again your samp
On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:38:08 -0500
Joseph Acquisto wrote:
> One thing I don't understand is why I no longer see RBL's showing as
> being checked. I'd think these folks should show up on at least one.
Hard to say, I see that once again your sample spam has been set to
expire after 24 hours. In one
On Sun, 2012-11-11 at 10:38 -0500, Joseph Acquisto wrote:
> RBL checks were seen, after I removed the -L from /etc/sysconfig/spamd.cf,
> but have
> since stopped. I don't know when it stopped.
>
Its probably worth running a piece of known blacklisting spam through
spamassassin manually with deb
We've had 10+ of these. Our cracked users can't say what it was they did to
get cracked.
We HOLD: them with postfwd sender rate-limiting on our outbound mx.
Never in the 1000s usually 100 to 150 per batch.
Anybody know of any email that is a vector for this probable phish?
Len
>>> On 11/10/2012 at 4:48 PM, "Joseph Acquisto" wrote:
On 11/10/2012 at 11:35 AM, John Hardin wrote:
>> On Sat, 10 Nov 2012, Joseph Acquisto wrote:
>>
>>> Should it not have been caught, anyway, they being a known spammer?
>>
>> A "known spammer" that has sent you similar messages in the p
