On 29/08/13 13:26, Michael Schaap wrote:
>
> # Punish fake LinkedIn mail
> header __FROM_LINKEDIN From =~ /\@linkedin\.com/i
> metaFROM_LINKEDIN_NO_SPF(__FROM_LINKEDIN && !SPF_PASS &&
> !SPF_HELO_PASS)
> score FROM_LINKEDIN_NO_SPF5.0
>
> This seems to do the trick
>Unfortunately not, for the most part. (The "From:" header is at linkedin
>dot com, but the envelope sender is a random address, and I guess SPF
>and DKIM run on the envelope sender only.)
DKIM runs on the message body. If it doesn't have a valid DKIM signature
from linkedin, you can be quite s
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013, Michael Schaap wrote:
On 29-Aug-2013 00:30, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Michael Schaap wrote:
Hi,
I'm getting loads of fake LinkedIn invites, most of which aren't caught by
SpamAssassin.
Does anyone have a good SpamAssassin rule to catch those, while letting
On 29-Aug-2013 00:55, Michael Schaap wrote:
On 29-Aug-2013 00:30, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Michael Schaap wrote:
Hi,
I'm getting loads of fake LinkedIn invites, most of which aren't
caught by SpamAssassin.
Does anyone have a good SpamAssassin rule to catch those, while
lettin
On 29-Aug-2013 00:30, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Michael Schaap wrote:
Hi,
I'm getting loads of fake LinkedIn invites, most of which aren't
caught by SpamAssassin.
Does anyone have a good SpamAssassin rule to catch those, while
letting real LinkedIn invites through?
Do they fai
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Michael Schaap wrote:
Hi,
I'm getting loads of fake LinkedIn invites, most of which aren't caught by
SpamAssassin.
Does anyone have a good SpamAssassin rule to catch those, while letting real
LinkedIn invites through?
Do they fail SPF or DKIM?
If they do, and the legit
Hi,
I'm getting loads of fake LinkedIn invites, most of which aren't caught
by SpamAssassin.
Does anyone have a good SpamAssassin rule to catch those, while letting
real LinkedIn invites through?
Thanks,
- Michael
>>> On 8/23/2013 at 6:43 AM, "Joe Acquisto-j4" wrote:
On 8/23/2013 at 3:42 AM, James Griffin wrote:
>> !-- On Wed 21.Aug'13 at 14:51:56 BST, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
>> (uh...@fantomas.sk), wrote:
>>
>>> On 21.08.13 09:47, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote:
>>> >I find a few of those 3 link (sudden cra
!-- On Sat 24.Aug'13 at 0:40:26 BST, Marcio Humpris (marciohump...@gmail.com),
wrote:
> please, i know its been talked about before, but isnt there a rule to deal
> with 1 word spams?
>
> spams that just have text "Hi!" and thats it.
It's unlikely, imo, that emails with just hi! will be spam.
