Re: unsubscribe

Wrong address. To unsubscribe, send a mail to the appropriate list-command address, not the mailing list itself. See the headers of each and every post on this list: list-help: list-unsubscribe: -

Re: Pattern SPAM seen today with full-name ending with dot-digits.

Hi, On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Andy Balholm wrote: > > On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Philip Prindeville < > philipp_s...@redfish-solutions.com> wrote: > > > Saw the following SPAM: > > > > http://pastebin.com/eLm1iRpN > > That’s the same group of spams that I just posted a rule for, but I’m

unsubscribe

Re: Ready to throw in the towel on email providing...

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > What do other people do? Or are we just going to end up with an Internet in > about 10 years where every single email box is either on Microsoft 365 or > Gmail and the NSA has a wonderful interface to use to hunt through whatever > they want without bothering with a warra

Re: More text/plain questions

--On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 9:39 PM +0100 Martin Gregorie wrote: On Wed, 2014-07-23 at 11:45 -0600, Amir 'CG' Caspi wrote: I'm definitely considering writing a rule to catch �[0-9]{3}; patterns. I'm definitely worried it could cause FPs, but are there common circumstances where legitimate

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: On 8/5/2014 1:48 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Andy Balholm wrote: > On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:31 AM, John Hardin wrote: > > > There's already a rule for this sort of thing in the sandbox. > > > > http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/201408

Re: stable branch vs trunk

On 8/4/2014 9:56 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote: On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 09:22 -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: Hi Karsten, I did bring this up a few months ago discussing releases. I'm currently catching up on list mail, and figured recent threads might be more important than revising old-ish, fini

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On 8/5/2014 1:48 PM, John Hardin wrote: On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Andy Balholm wrote: On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:31 AM, John Hardin wrote: There's already a rule for this sort of thing in the sandbox. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20140804-r1615505-n/HEXHASH_WORD/detail How do I find the actual rul

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Aug 5, 2014, at 11:16 AM, John Hardin wrote: > It can hit on embedded phone numbers, which are, strictly speaking, valid > hexadecimal strings... > I suspect it's hitting on all those dates as well, and needs some more > tightening. In the spams I’m looking at, all the hex strings are 32 c

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Andy Balholm wrote: On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:48 AM, John Hardin wrote: Unfortunately the masscheck pages' links to SVN got broken in the recent rebuild. That rule lives here: https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_misc_testing.cf?view=

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:48 AM, John Hardin wrote: > Unfortunately the masscheck pages' links to SVN got broken in the recent > rebuild. > > That rule lives here: > > https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_misc_testing.cf?view=log > > It should be part of th

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Andy Balholm wrote: On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:31 AM, John Hardin wrote: There's already a rule for this sort of thing in the sandbox. http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20140804-r1615505-n/HEXHASH_WORD/detail How do I find the actual rule that the page is about? Unfortunately

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:31 AM, John Hardin wrote: > > There's already a rule for this sort of thing in the sandbox. > > http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20140804-r1615505-n/HEXHASH_WORD/detail How do I find the actual rule that the page is about?

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On Tue, 5 Aug 2014, Andy Balholm wrote: The last few days, I’ve been getting a lot of spams that have a similar pattern. They are plain-text messages, and each one ends with a paragraph from a restaurant review (apparently to confuse bayesian filters), with some numbers inserted. There is an

Re: rule for repeated tracking numbers

On 8/5/2014 1:08 PM, Andy Balholm wrote: The last few days, I’ve been getting a lot of spams that have a similar pattern. They are plain-text messages, and each one ends with a paragraph from a restaurant review (apparently to confuse bayesian filters), with some numbers inserted. There is an

Re: Pattern SPAM seen today with full-name ending with dot-digits.

On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote: > Saw the following SPAM: > > http://pastebin.com/eLm1iRpN That’s the same group of spams that I just posted a rule for, but I’m looking at the repeated numbers in the last paragraph.

Re: Yahoo no longer accepting spam reports -- time to block.

On Aug 2, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Jo Rhett wrote: > When you send an e-mail to yahoo's published abuse contact, you get back an > e-mail saying to report the issue at http://abuse.yahoo.com/. Now, I really > and truly hate people who think that you should do their job for them, and > that being a v

Pattern SPAM seen today with full-name ending with dot-digits.

Saw the following SPAM: http://pastebin.com/eLm1iRpN Note that: header From:name =~ /\.\d{7,8}$/ seems to detect it reliably. Easier than trying to detect the “notice” or “ref.no.” etc. that some have at the end of the subject line.

rule for repeated tracking numbers

The last few days, I’ve been getting a lot of spams that have a similar pattern. They are plain-text messages, and each one ends with a paragraph from a restaurant review (apparently to confuse bayesian filters), with some numbers inserted. There is an 8-digit decimal number and a 32-digit hex o

Re: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

On 08/05/2014 06:06 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote: On 8/5/2014 11:50 AM, RobertGrimes wrote: I don't know if this is fair to ask, but would you (or anyone) care to see if the message I am posting should be rated higher than 1.9? I appologize if this is not appropriate. The message is at http://pasteb

Re: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

On 8/5/2014 11:50 AM, RobertGrimes wrote: I don't know if this is fair to ask, but would you (or anyone) care to see if the message I am posting should be rated higher than 1.9? I appologize if this is not appropriate. The message is at http://pastebin.com/UZeDtLWZ The debug log from spamd is

Re: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

From: RobertGrimes Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 08:50:44 -0700 (PDT) I don't know if this is fair to ask, but would you (or anyone) care to see if the message I am posting should be rated higher than 1.9? I appologize if this is not appropriate. The message is at http://pastebin

Re: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote > On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 13:02 -0700, Robert Grimes wrote: >> Robert Grimes wrote > >> > I have changed the user that runs the spamd service to be the same as >> when >> > I ran from command line. I will see what, if any changes occur. I will >> > leave Bayes alone for t

RE: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

Kevin Miller-18 wrote > Easy to test. Go to a command line, and run nslookup. From the > prompt, > type: > Server DNS-SERVER-NAME-OR-IP > > Then type in any domain you want to query. If it returns a valid address > it's working. I think DNS servers cache lookups by default. > > What's ref

Re: New at SpamAssassin - how to not get headers

On 04.08.14 12:51, RobertGrimes wrote: I have changed the user that runs the spamd service to be the same as when I ran from command line. I will see what, if any changes occur. I will leave Bayes alone for the moment; just try one thing at a time to keep the confusion down. It's better to chan