Hi,
>> This type of honeypot can find numerous bad actors and identify
>> dictionary attackers. It has excellent merit and many people use this
>> type of data. You might find it useful for blocking IPs, finding bad
>> URLs, identifying spam for bayes, etc.
>
> easy to kill legit/ESP bulk and us
On 2015-12-16 14:21 -0800, jdow wrote:
> One thing worth pointing out is if this CAN be done refusing to do it
> yourself is a shallow gesture.
No, it is not. Refusing to take part in what you believe is wrong, even
if you know the wrong will be done eventually because the Zeitgeist
favors it, i
On 2015-12-16 14:15, Wrolf wrote:
Video/audio/stills are a problem.
How about crowd sourcing ISIS identification, with sufficient votes (of
sufficient reputation) leading to RBL style blocking by IP address, and
retroactive elimination of posts spread across all media?
BTW, I am aware that Face
Video/audio/stills are a problem.
How about crowd sourcing ISIS identification, with sufficient votes (of
sufficient reputation) leading to RBL style blocking by IP address, and
retroactive elimination of posts spread across all media?
BTW, I am aware that Facebook has programmers. They seem not
On 16 Dec 2015, at 13:39, John Hardin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Bill Cole wrote:
ISIS uses any "social media" where the proprietors welcome them. That
is a business decision of for-profit private enterprises based in
lightly-regulated jurisdictions (mostly the US and EU) who mostly
have no
--On Wednesday, December 16, 2015 6:28 PM +0100 Mark Martinec
wrote:
Tried it now with 3.4.1 and Net::DNS 1.04.
You still need to apply the patch from Bug 7223 (in addition
to a patch from Bug 7231), then it passes all tests with
Net::DNS 1.04 (even without patches from Bug 7265).
Seems easi
Wrolf,
Facebook (et al.) already have extremely powerful engines and many engineers
working on anti-spam/anti-fraud technologies. They're quite good at keeping
most of the spam out of your Timeline. They don't need "our" help.
The same techniques could plausibly be used to block ISIS propagan
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Bill Cole wrote:
ISIS uses any "social media" where the proprietors welcome them. That is a
business decision of for-profit private enterprises based in
lightly-regulated jurisdictions (mostly the US and EU) who mostly have not
thought about that choice in those terms.
T
Thanks Bill. I guess I should restate my question.
Would it be practical for
Twitter/Facebook/SnapChat/WhatsApp/Microsoft/Telegraph to use SpamAssassin
like techniques of Bayesian filtering and RBL lists to block ISIS on social
media?
This is an invitation for discussion, not a rhetorical questio
On 15 Dec 2015, at 23:19, Wrolf wrote:
Stop me if you've heard this one.
Would it be practical to use the Spamassassin techniques of Bayesian
filtering and RBL lists to block ISIS on social media?
I've definitely heard similarly unfunny and poorly thought-out jokes
before. Bill Gates had one
Not sure about SPF. It's supposed to be fixed in the current 3.4 branch
and in trunk, which is why I'm not seeing a problem with Net::DNS 1.03
or Net::DNS 1.04. Will check how the released version of 3.4.1 fares
with Net::DNS 1.04 regarding SPF. The emergency patches were applied
to FreeBSD ports,
--On Wednesday, December 16, 2015 4:13 PM + Ian Eiloart
wrote:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 16:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.12.2015 um 17:00 schrieb Ian Eiloart:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in
trunk.
Ian Eiloart wrote:
I had this problem after upgrading from a rather old version of SA.
After
upgrading to Net::DNS 1.04, the errors aren’t logged, but SpamAssassin
isn’t
finding SPF records. I wonder whether anyone can offer any suggestions.
[...]
Yesterday, I upgraded Net::DNS 1.03 to Net::D
On 12/16/2015 11:00 AM, Ian Eiloart wrote:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in trunk.
Regards,
KAM
Downgrade? I upgraded to 1.04: does that not fix the problem?
Are you running 3.4.1 or trunk? If trunk, 1.04 mig
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015 16:13:03 -, Ian Eiloart wrote:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 16:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 16.12.2015 um 17:00 schrieb Ian Eiloart:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in
trunk.
Regards,
K
> On 16 Dec 2015, at 16:09, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
>
> Am 16.12.2015 um 17:00 schrieb Ian Eiloart:
>>
>>> On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>>>
>>> Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in trunk.
>>> Regards,
>>> KAM
>>
>> Downgrade? I upgraded
Am 16.12.2015 um 17:00 schrieb Ian Eiloart:
On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in trunk.
Regards,
KAM
Downgrade? I upgraded to 1.04: does that not fix the problem?
you answered that question at your own by o
> On 16 Dec 2015, at 15:30, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
> Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in trunk.
> Regards,
> KAM
Downgrade? I upgraded to 1.04: does that not fix the problem?
--
Ian Eiloart
Postmaster, University of Sussex
+44 (0) 1273 87-3148
Am 16.12.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Shawn Bakhtiar:
On Dec 16, 2015, at 1:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 15.12.2015 um 23:25 schrieb Juerg Reimann:
I have a domain which gets a lot of spam to non-existent addresses. I
thought why not set that domain to catch-all and feed all non-existent
addresse
Downgrade tour netdns. There were changes in 1.03 that are fixed in trunk.
Regards,
KAM
On December 16, 2015 9:49:38 AM EST, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I had this problem after upgrading from a rather old version of SA.
>After upgrading to Net::DNS 1.04, the errors aren’t logged, but
>SpamAssass
Hi,
I had this problem after upgrading from a rather old version of SA. After
upgrading to Net::DNS 1.04, the errors aren’t logged, but SpamAssassin isn’t
finding SPF records. I wonder whether anyone can offer any suggestions.
I’m calling spamd from Exim.
/opt/local/bin/spamd --version
Spa
Am 15.12.2015 um 23:25 schrieb Juerg Reimann:
I have a domain which gets a lot of spam to non-existent addresses. I
thought why not set that domain to catch-all and feed all non-existent
addresses directly to spamassassin. Any thoughts why this could be a bad
idea? Of course any typos from real
22 matches
Mail list logo
