Here's the current version I'm using based on 3.4.0 trunk:
We're seeing many different variations. For example, we see over
70 variations in the name (not just "Connor Hopkins").
Agreed. That's more of an internal meta because we had one person really
getting hammered. YMMV.
I've been curio
On 2/22/2013 4:01 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:56:38 -0500
"Kevin A. McGrail" wrote:
Here's the current version I'm using based on 3.4.0 trunk:
We're seeing many different variations. For example, we see over
70 variations in the name (not just "Connor Hopkins").
Agreed.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 15:56:38 -0500
"Kevin A. McGrail" wrote:
> Here's the current version I'm using based on 3.4.0 trunk:
We're seeing many different variations. For example, we see over
70 variations in the name (not just "Connor Hopkins").
Regards,
David.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 03:27:27PM -0500, David F. Skoll wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:20:22 -0800
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>
> > We need a rule to catch this. It looks like more data than it is but
> > it's really little more than a single link. Like to see a rule that
> > identifies it.
>
> Ou
On 2/22/2013 3:27 PM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:20:22 -0800
Marc Perkel wrote:
We need a rule to catch this. It looks like more data than it is but
it's really little more than a single link. Like to see a rule that
identifies it.
Our product lets you make compound rules.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:20:22 -0800
Marc Perkel wrote:
> We need a rule to catch this. It looks like more data than it is but
> it's really little more than a single link. Like to see a rule that
> identifies it.
Our product lets you make compound rules. It should not be very hard
to translate
We need a rule to catch this. It looks like more data than it is but
it's really little more than a single link. Like to see a rule that
identifies it.
---262101065-1882747875-1361559395=:62570
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
http://www.eisingen.de/kb/m6ods3ohyayq.r34xx5y7k8rn1ycne
Kenneth Porter skrev den 2013-02-22 02:03:
I'm noticing the following header in recent "romance" spam that looks
like it might be an easy pattern to match.
its easy to make clamav sigs aswell :)
but is the envelope-sender matching the unsubscribe domain ?, if so
reject sender domain in mta
