nfigurable list
appears.
I suspect they'll allow a configurable list of TLDs going forward.
Best,
Jesse Stroik
3.3.2-4 -- is it a known issue? The URL in question is on a
single line and is easily pulled out with egrep and properly parsed with
the body rule.
Best,
Jesse Stroik
On 10/13/2014 2:53 PM, Dave Funk wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2014, Philip Prindeville wrote:
Every connection I’ve gotten f
> "Interestingly, the majority of energy usage (around 80%) comes from
users viewing and deleting spam, and searching for legitimate emails
within spam filters."
Right -- if your users can't trust their 'spam' folder as spam, then
what is the point? They should keep it around so they can che
Matus,
Dropping mail outright because you can't reverse-resolve the mail server
is bad, of course. And it /will/ drop messages from legitimate mail
servers, especially those on private networks behind mail proxies as
many older exchange installations are configured. And those
installations a
Hoover Chan wrote:
The threshold was set to 6.6 (cf. required=6.6). The message this was attached
to was very definitely junk. This kind of situation got me curious about the
whole thing where any positive spam score is set as the threshold but seeing
junk mail coming in with negative scores.
Kris Deugau wrote:
Jesse Stroik wrote:
You don't. Hit delete.
Sorry, there aren't enough of me to hand-filter 30K ISP user accounts.
I wasn't clear. I'm suggesting the user delete them. Overaggressive
spam filters that get false positives are much more dangerous
John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 12 Feb 2009, Kris Deugau wrote:
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
Do you greylist?
Of course not. The assumption that spammers cannot follow RFCs is a
silly one. There are a variety of greylisting
Kris Deugau wrote:
What do you do to push that last 5% or so of missed spam over the
threshold from nonspam to spam?
You don't. Hit delete.
If AI is ever truly developed, then your computer may be able to more
accurately determine spam from nonspam, but for a lot of spam where
spamassassi
Kate,
The previous discussion of the windows live spaces spam was from
10/18/2008 and it has the subject "Windows Live Spaces spam". That
should help you search the archive.
I will look into the BOTNET as I don't believe we are using this at the
moment. Do you get many fp's with this?
I
Think twice before doing this -- just like a computer cannot interpret
the intent of a message, it cannot interpret the content of an image.
The computer is most certainly guessing, and many of the algorithms
spammers use these days to make their images unique would likely defeat it.
Karsten s
Bowie,
What does having the mail gateway on an internal network have to do with
anything? If it is going to send mail to the Internet, then it must
have a public IP address in order to do so. This address may be local
to the machine or it may be translated by a router or firewall, but
either
Kris Deugau wrote:
Jesse Stroik wrote:
There are plenty of places still using mail gateways where the mail
server used for sending is still on an internal network, for a variety
of legitimate reasons, and those mail servers may resolve to a private
address. If you discard all mail with no
igured makes spam
filtering potentially more damaging to email than spam itself.
Best,
Jesse Stroik
Mouss,
mouss wrote:
It's more than a "common user" question. while I can build an
*BSD/Debian/Centos box to do what I want, I did buy "COTS" firewalls,
backup servers, ... etc.
You're not talking about ease of setup, you're talking about quality and
reliability of product. Spamassassin doe
Karl,
Ease of setup and use are not the primary reason for purchasing any
product, IMO.
Yes, but you aren't the common user. Many commercial products *must*
have oversimplified setups if they want the largest possible customer
base. Consider the difference between the primary goals of sp
Rob,
Spamassassin is more difficult to configure because commercial products
don't have the luxury of requiring more sysadmin configuration. They
have to be easy or no one would buy them. The disadvantage of them
being easier is that they have less flexibility, less information and
less sit
Stefan,
Fantastic. This works. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.
Best,
Jesse
Stefan Jakobs wrote:
On Friday 02 May 2008 17:24, Jesse Stroik wrote:
SA-Users,
I'm running spamassassin rules 648641 for 3.2.4 fetched by sa-update.
I've run into two issues with my cur
are
being flagged as bounces and how I can fix the whitelist_bounce_relays
issue? Email addresses have been stripped from the headers of each message.
Best,
Jesse Stroik
-
Return-Path:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on
mahogany.sse
18 matches
Mail list logo
