On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 18:29 -0700, John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 24 May 2019, Chris Pollock wrote:
>
> > This is the 2nd of these ransom spams I've received where the body
> > of
> > the message is a .jpg. Below is the body and also a link to the
> > headers
> > and body
> >
> > https://photos.app
On Fri, 24 May 2019, Chris Pollock wrote:
This is the 2nd of these ransom spams I've received where the body of
the message is a .jpg. Below is the body and also a link to the headers
and body
https://photos.app.goo.gl/DGcjySsnEHL3uKBa7
https://pastebin.com/xNRZ5UeC
There's not a whole lot t
This is the 2nd of these ransom spams I've received where the body of
the message is a .jpg. Below is the body and also a link to the headers
and body
https://photos.app.goo.gl/DGcjySsnEHL3uKBa7
https://pastebin.com/xNRZ5UeC
The SA Markup is:
Content analysis details: (12.2 points, 5.0 requir
On Fri, 24 May 2019, @lbutlr wrote:
I've noticed that the majority of spam I get comes in between 0900 and 1000,
local time. In the past couple of months well more than 50% of spam (well, at
least spam that isn't getting tagged) comes in during this hour, with a smaller
percentage within an o
On Fri, 24 May 2019, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On Thu, 23 May 2019, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I see. This is another case where local clients hit bunch of rules
designed
to catch remote bots.
I'm thinking if I should disable the rule or if it's better to re-write it
only to match on
I've noticed that the majority of spam I get comes in between 0900 and 1000,
local time. In the past couple of months well more than 50% of spam (well, at
least spam that isn't getting tagged) comes in during this hour, with a smaller
percentage within an our (0800-0900, 1000-1100).
Just me?
A
On Thu, 23 May 2019, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
I see. This is another case where local clients hit bunch of rules designed
to catch remote bots.
I'm thinking if I should disable the rule or if it's better to re-write it
only to match on remote (untrusted) hosts.
On 23.05.19 14:09, John Ha
I'm not but it is an interesting idea. Have any spamples?
On 5/24/2019 10:14 AM, John Schmerold wrote:
> Anyone know of a SA rule that would assign points if SA finds an ABA
> Routing # in the email message?
>
> I am wanting to block evil-doers from saying "Good morning payroll, I
> have a new ban
Anyone know of a SA rule that would assign points if SA finds an ABA
Routing # in the email message?
I am wanting to block evil-doers from saying "Good morning payroll, I
have a new bank. Please send my next paycheck to Bank of Bad Guy, ABA
1234214131421"
--
John Schmerold
Katy Computer Syst
