On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:30 PM, Dave Pooser wrote:
> On 12/4/14, 3:10 PM, "Philip Prindeville"
> wrote:
>
>> Not necessarily. If I post to a list with this address, and wait 60
>> days, I can assume that 99.999% of email that comes back after that date
>> is not related to the original posting.
>
On 05/12/2014 14:40, Dave Pooser wrote:
> On 12/4/14 10:27 PM, "Nick Edwards" wrote:
> It's also not wrapping the text at all. it wraps fine here
Look at the last roundcube post, the one sent at 01:06 GMT. The line of
quoted text runs 273 columns without a linewrap.
What client are you usin
On 12/4/14 10:27 PM, "Nick Edwards" wrote:
>> It's also not wrapping the text at all.
> it wraps fine here
Look at the last roundcube post, the one sent at 01:06 GMT. The line of
quoted text runs 273 columns without a linewrap.
--
Dave Pooser
Cat-Herder-in-Chief, Pooserville.com
On 12/5/14, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>
> On 12/4/2014 6:24 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 20:22 -0600, Dave Pooser wrote:
>>> > strange, it indicates 12pt, and looks same size when returned on list
>>> > as
>>> >everyone elses, something must be a miss, hows this one? it's from
On 12/4/2014 6:24 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 20:22 -0600, Dave Pooser wrote:
> strange, it indicates 12pt, and looks same size when returned on list as
>everyone elses, something must be a miss, hows this one? it's from
>evolution
That one looked significantly larger in my
On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 20:22 -0600, Dave Pooser wrote:
> > strange, it indicates 12pt, and looks same size when returned on list as
> >everyone elses, something must be a miss, hows this one? it's from
> >evolution
>
> That one looked significantly larger in my mail client (Outlook 2011 for
> Maci
> strange, it indicates 12pt, and looks same size when returned on list as
>everyone elses, something must be a miss, hows this one? it's from
>evolution
That one looked significantly larger in my mail client (Outlook 2011 for
Macintosh). Looking at source, your previous had 'font-size: 10pt' and
On Thu, 2014-12-04 at 17:45 -0800, jdow wrote:
> Clipped from the quoted message:
>
> body style=3D'font-size: 10pt'
>
> 12 pt would be better. Everybody else seems to come through with 12pt or
> larger
> font - or else plain text, which sane people prefer. (I may have to read HTML
> format.
On 2014-12-04 17:06, Noel Butler wrote:
On 05/12/2014 06:19, jdow wrote:
Speaking of footnotes, I don't have teeny tiny eyes for reading teeny tiny
print. Could you please use a slightly larger font? The world is not uniformly
made up of hairy chested (lose me right there) 20-40 year old (lo
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 23:40:39 +0100
Axb wrote:
> uri__URI_COSTCO /costco\.com/i
> uri __URI_PHPASKC /\.php\?c\=/
> meta AXB_URI_COSTCO_JJ (__URI_COSTCO && __URI_PHPASKC)
> score AXB_URI_COSTCO_JJ 10.0
I've seen variants purportedly from Kroger, Target and Best Buy.
We're ha
On 4. dec. 2014 22.42.42 Axb wrote:
To be able to create usable rules, several times/day I need feeds to
spit *at least* +150k/day. As I don't have the data
So not possible to make it run decentraly ?
This imho another precompiled problem
On 05/12/2014 06:19, jdow wrote:
> Speaking of footnotes, I don't have teeny tiny eyes for reading teeny tiny
> print. Could you please use a slightly larger font? The world is not
> uniformly made up of hairy chested (lose me right there) 20-40 year old (lose
> me there, too) wunderkinds.
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014 22:41:13 +0100,
Axb wrote:
Axb> To be able to create usable rules, several times/day I need feeds
Axb> to spit *at least* +150k/day. As I don't have the data
150k of what? Bytes? Emails? Tokens?
--
Please *no* private copies of mailing list or newsgroup messages.
Rul
On 2014-12-04 13:29, Bob Proulx wrote:
jdow wrote:
footnotes:
Speaking of footnotes, I don't have teeny tiny eyes for reading teeny tiny
print. Could you please use a slightly larger font? The world is not
uniformly made up of hairy chested (lose me right there) 20-40 year old
(lose me there,
On 12/04/2014 07:08 PM, Axb wrote:
On 12/04/2014 07:05 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/4/2014 1:03 PM, Axb wrote:
Costco.com currently offers shipping in the United States only. We are
not able to deliver to PO boxes, APO (military) boxes, FPO (foreign)
boxes, freight forwarders, hotels, Cos
On 12/04/2014 10:30 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:
Axb wrote:
It's been more than a month since my first "SOUGHT 2.0" msg.
A few have shown interest but as there hasn't been the flood of enthusiasm
and stuff getting done which I hoped for so I've dropped the idea of getting
a public autogenerated rule s
Axb wrote:
> It's been more than a month since my first "SOUGHT 2.0" msg.
>
> A few have shown interest but as there hasn't been the flood of enthusiasm
> and stuff getting done which I hoped for so I've dropped the idea of getting
> a public autogenerated rule set / sa-update channel going.
Good
On 12/4/14, 3:10 PM, "Philip Prindeville"
wrote:
>Not necessarily. If I post to a list with this address, and wait 60
>days, I can assume that 99.999% of email that comes back after that date
>is not related to the original posting.
>
>Further, after 15 days, anything which doesn't also copy the
jdow wrote:
> >footnotes:
>
> Speaking of footnotes, I don't have teeny tiny eyes for reading teeny tiny
> print. Could you please use a slightly larger font? The world is not
> uniformly made up of hairy chested (lose me right there) 20-40 year old
> (lose me there, too) wunderkinds. Thank you in
John Hardin wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> >But, but, but... It also failed lint and produced cron noise on my
> >perl 5.20.1 system too. Running spamassassin 3.4.0. That is later
> >than perl 5.18 and it definitely produced the warning message.
>
> That's two separate issues. The perl RE lint *e
On 12/04/2014 05:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 03.12.2014 um 23:56 schrieb Philip Prindeville:
On 11/21/2014 09:49 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:43:22 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
On a public mailng list isn't a great place to discuss such tactics...
I suspect spamme
On 2014-12-03 15:55, Noel Butler wrote:
On 04/12/2014 00:28, Greg Troxel wrote:
...
footnotes:
I use slackware, yes its releases come with latest versions of most things, and
updates move with upstreams due to slackwares philosophy and releases are
maintained for usually 5 or more years, but e
On 2014-12-03 15:39, Noel Butler wrote:
On 03/12/2014 21:57, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Sure, if that was truly the case nor would I, but if you are running that old
perl, there is plenty of stuff thats outdated, and not all of the goodness
gets backports, not just with perl, but with most other t
On 4. dec. 2014 18.50.41 Axb wrote:
It's been more than a month since my first "SOUGHT 2.0" msg.
+1
A few have shown interest but as there hasn't been the flood of
enthusiasm and stuff getting done which I hoped for so I've dropped the
idea of getting a public autogenerated rule set / sa-up
On 12/4/2014 1:40 PM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
On Dec 04, 2014, at 12.18, Joe Quinn wrote:
On 12/4/2014 11:17 AM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
hi-
i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear. can
someone check? my logs indicate successful
> On Dec 04, 2014, at 12.18, Joe Quinn wrote:
>
> On 12/4/2014 11:17 AM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
>> hi-
>>
>> i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear.
>> can someone check? my logs indicate successful delivery to
>> mx1.us.apache.org:
>>
>> Dec
On 12/04/14 18:49, Axb wrote:
A few have shown interest but as there hasn't been the flood of
enthusiasm and stuff getting done which I hoped for so I've dropped the
idea of getting a public autogenerated rule set / sa-update channel going.
Hello.
With the risk of sounding stupid...
I would
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014, Bob Proulx wrote:
John Hardin wrote:
Bob Proulx wrote:
There have been multiple facets to this problem. The first was a rule
update that produced warnings that produced email from every cron run
sa-update / sa-learn run if run on recent released spamassassin 3.4.0
but not
On 12/04/2014 07:05 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
On 12/4/2014 1:03 PM, Axb wrote:
Costco.com currently offers shipping in the United States only. We are
not able to deliver to PO boxes, APO (military) boxes, FPO (foreign)
boxes, freight forwarders, hotels, Costco Warehouses, international
addres
On 12/4/2014 1:03 PM, Axb wrote:
Costco.com currently offers shipping in the United States only. We are
not able to deliver to PO boxes, APO (military) boxes, FPO (foreign)
boxes, freight forwarders, hotels, Costco Warehouses, international
addresses, or a few limited geographic areas within
Costco.com currently offers shipping in the United States only. We are
not able to deliver to PO boxes, APO (military) boxes, FPO (foreign)
boxes, freight forwarders, hotels, Costco Warehouses, international
addresses, or a few limited geographic areas within the U.S.
If a product is availa
It's been more than a month since my first "SOUGHT 2.0" msg.
A few have shown interest but as there hasn't been the flood of
enthusiasm and stuff getting done which I hoped for so I've dropped the
idea of getting a public autogenerated rule set / sa-update channel going.
If I can get enough d
John Hardin wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > There have been multiple facets to this problem. The first was a rule
> > update that produced warnings that produced email from every cron run
> > sa-update / sa-learn run if run on recent released spamassassin 3.4.0
> > but not the development trunk ver
On 12/4/2014 11:17 AM, listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
hi-
i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear. can
someone check? my logs indicate successful delivery to mx1.us.apache.org:
Dec 3 17:48:24 mta postfix/smtp[10226]: 3jtFgN6Dfmz9s2b:
to=, relay=mx1.u
On Thu, 4 Dec 2014, Noel Butler wrote:
On 04/12/2014 00:54, Christian Grunfeld wrote:
"It would be very rare, and if so you would ever more rare CC the
entire list of addresses on your spam message -
sure this was a lot more common in years gone by, but I've not seen any
such
The infra team is busy with the emergency issues re: SVN and they would
be the only ones who could help. Suggest you just resend and cc me off
list.
If you are discussing spam and have included real spam samples, you'll
likely want to put that info in pastebin and link to it.
If you mention
> I've seen a number of spam messages come through with multiple header
> lines ... some of them are blank.
>
> Subject:
>
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=20The=20Hotte?==?ISO-8859-1?Q?st=20Sm?==?ISO-8859-1?Q?ar?==?ISO-8859-1?Q?tpho?==?ISO
Folks:
I've seen a number of spam messages come through with multiple header lines ...
some of them are blank.
Subject:
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=20The=20Hotte?
hi-
i sent a message to the list yesterday, but have not yet seen it appear. can
someone check? my logs indicate successful delivery to mx1.us.apache.org:
Dec 3 17:48:24 mta postfix/smtp[10226]: 3jtFgN6Dfmz9s2b:
to=, relay=mx1.us.apache.org[140.211.11.136]:25,
delay=56, delays=0.45/0.02/30/
On Wed, 3 Dec 2014, Bob Proulx wrote:
There have been multiple facets to this problem. The first was a rule
update that produced warnings that produced email from every cron run
sa-update / sa-learn run if run on recent released spamassassin 3.4.0
but not the development trunk version.
That w
Jim Clausing wrote:
> What I haven't noticed anyone else mention is that I was getting that error
> message even though the perl on my Ubuntu 14.04 system is 5.18.2.
You left off your spamassassin version. I assume 3.4.0? On my Debian
sid system. (But never use Unstable for a production system.
On 12/3/2014 6:39 PM, Noel Butler wrote:
On 03/12/2014 21:57, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Sure, if that was truly the case nor would I, but if you are running
that old perl, there is plenty of stuff thats outdated, and not all
of the goodness gets backports, not just with perl, but with most
oth
On 2014.12.03 05.45, Mark Martinec wrote:
> listsb-spamassas...@bitrate.net wrote:
>> i was testing with a sample message, and noticed that when running
>> manually with --debug, there seem to be numerous differences in the
>> results, such as scores for the same tests differing, visual ordering
>>
On 04/12/2014 00:28, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I am really boggled by people wanting to run LTS versions of code with
> old versions of tools and expecting to run newer versions of other
> things.
>
> More constructively, it's perfectly possible to build newer perl in a
> different prefix. Just be
On 03/12/2014 21:57, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>> Sure, if that was truly the case nor would I, but if you are running that
>> old perl, there is plenty of stuff thats outdated, and not all of the
>> goodness gets backports, not just with perl, but with most other things.
> I can't fight every
On 12/3/2014 6:28 AM, Greg Troxel wrote:
I am really boggled by people wanting to run LTS versions of code with
old versions of tools and expecting to run newer versions of other
things.
Microsoft thinks like you do, that's why Internet Explorer 8 was the
last version of IE to run on Windo
Am 03.12.2014 um 02:32 schrieb LuKreme:
another recent example:
Spamhaus blocked GMX/1&1/Web.de completly *by a mistake*, no problem in case of
scoring, a ruined weekend if we had used it as only source
The extremely occasional mistaken black is more than made up for by the vast
quantities o
On 12/3/2014 7:38 AM, Jim Clausing wrote:
What I haven't noticed anyone else mention is that I was getting that
error message even though the perl on my Ubuntu 14.04 system is 5.18.2.
No, they mentioned it - the problem is that the proposed "fix" to allow
inclusion of the new fancy rules on
On 12/2/2014 5:32 PM, LuKreme wrote:
I have *never* considered Barracuda to be reliable. At least they have stopped
their practice of listing my server and then sending me spam offering to sell
me their crapware to keep it off blacklists for per month.
I think there's a direct corre
I'm only expecting new rules sets to work, sir. I still run a lamentably antique
version of SA with my middle aged version of perl.
{o.o}
On 2014-12-03 06:28, Greg Troxel wrote:
I am really boggled by people wanting to run LTS versions of code with
old versions of tools and expecting to run n
Am 03.12.2014 um 23:56 schrieb Philip Prindeville:
On 11/21/2014 09:49 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:43:22 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
On a public mailng list isn't a great place to discuss such tactics...
I suspect spammers are dumb and will just vacuum up any address
read my reply to Chris, its rather simple - if you care (and we have
some pretty damn illiterate users, if they can get it right, anyone can)
Oh additional point, it also helps if your CSR's also have a clue, and
sound confident when talking to users, if they sound hesitant u's
and ars
On 04/12/2014 00:54, Christian Grunfeld wrote:
> "It would be very rare, and if so you would ever more rare CC the entire
> list of addresses on your spam message - sure this was a lot more common in
> years gone by, but I've not seen any such evidence of it in almost 10 years,
> and if
On 11/21/2014 09:49 AM, David F. Skoll wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 08:43:22 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
On a public mailng list isn't a great place to discuss such tactics...
I suspect spammers are dumb and will just vacuum up any address
they can find. Also, the scammers who sell CDs wit
54 matches
Mail list logo
