Excuse the top post, on a blackberry.
They have a list/newsgroup where you can email the 'deputies'. If it is still
the way they used to be run, they aren't really false positives. Those servers
really are sending spam. I think all listings are automatically removed after a
few days or so.
---
On 4/1/2011 5:31 PM, Michael Scheidell wrote:
numnuts at
uppermohawkinc.com doesn't know how to run a mail server, and should
not be 'backscatter' bouncing email.
I just got 6 bounces (not smtp reject) but bounces from them for email
sent to users@spamassassin.apache.org
anyone that does th
On 3/31/2011 1:34 PM, Ned Slider wrote:
I'd go a step further and say no way you should be accepting
executables at the smtp level, so no reason to be passing them to SA
for scanning in the first place. These should be rejected or
quarantined elsewhere in the mail chain.
Agreed. One of my o
On 3/5/2011 3:36 PM, Cimoni Enwis Ogwujiakwu wrote:
Hello All,
I trying to set up an anti-spam and anti-virus proxy solution with
spamassassin, clamav and clamsmtp. I have currently setup
postifix,spamassassin,clamav, and clamsmtp and everything is working
fine but I do not want the postfix in
, Matthew Kitchin (usenet/public) wrote:
> Sorry for top posting, on a bberry. So, you would say someone can
> send me a letter in the mail with the condition I am only allowed to
> read it one time?
Yes.
Nobody ever said the law isn't stupid. But in fact the newest
Blue Ray sp
Sorry for top posting, on a bberry.
So, you would say someone can send me a letter in the mail with the condition I
am only allowed to read it one time? I call BS too. The movie example is
completely different. The purchase of a ticket is an agreement to watch the
movie one time. No agreement e
On 8/9/2010 8:27 AM, Henrik K wrote:
Nope, people constantly underestimate the power of regexes.. of course you
can easily make bad ones, but Perl can run huge lists of simple alternations
FAST.
I downloaded a 1 random name pack, and made a quick hack to regexify it
with my favourite Regexp
On 8/5/2010 2:10 PM, Noel Jones wrote:
Use your database to generate rules for clamav. You could even remove
the stock clamav rules if you want. Matching the body for 70,000
names would probably take less than 0.1 seconds.
That sounds like a really good idea. I do use ClamAV but have never
w
On 8/5/2010 2:05 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
I would tend to say that something that large would not be practical.
On the other hand, there's no way to really know until you try it.
A database lookup is possible, but the problem is determining what to
look up. You would have to somehow identify po
On 8/5/2010 1:52 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
My approach to doing something like this would be to have a rule that
matches the names (however you implement it), and then have the MTA
check for that particular rule hit and bounce the message if it exists.
This is the same way you generally use the VB
On 8/5/2010 1:19 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On tor 05 aug 2010 19:47:37 CEST, "Matthew Kitchin (public/usenet)" wrote
Is this a realistic setup?
postfix will love it if done right with local smtp auth senders, eg no
sender sends unauthed then its just add smtpd_sender_bcc_naps fr
On 8/5/2010 1:03 PM, Evan Platt wrote:
Spamassassin can't handle this - it has no capability to reject mail,
however you need to think - are you going to have a database of
patients names, or is your intention to block anything with a "Name"?
Are you really going to want to manage a databse
Hello all. I have been a loyal users for years, but have never had to
do much more than make a few custom rules. I work for a healthcare
company, and I have been asked to implement a mechanism to search for
patient names in outgoing emails an bounce them back to the sender if
one is identified
Sur 2006-06-09, Marc Perkel skribis:
Perhaps the headers and other information that you would index
be kept in the database and the body of the message stored
somewhere else, perhaps even as files.
It seems that this is what Zimbra does. Check out my blog post
here:
For IMAP, "SQL just
Sur 2006-05-25, Evan Platt skribis:
Umm... Switch to a different mail provider?
I just blogged about this yesterday. If your university uses
IMAP, which is the case for almost all universities these days,
they can set things up so that each user has the option to have
his/her spammy message
Sur 2006-05-17, Yusuf Ahmed skribis:
Couldn't find a thread like this hence this new one. Just
wondering what strategy people are using when it comes to
dealing with email that gets enough points to be considered as
spam. Eg. being deleted and quarantined, or delivered and
quarantined etc.
Hi
> Does this happen on all mails or just specific ones?
It does happen on all mails and aswell on the samples of Spamassassin
> Do you have custom plugins loaded or is the install a default one?
No, I just installed the default one by
# perls Makefile.PL
# make
# make install
regards,
On 22 Mar 2005 Robert Markin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
This should probably be obvious, but I cannot seem to come up with an easy
way to quickly scan and delete the email that makes it into my spam trap
folders.
RH9 machine (accessed via SSH, Webmin, IMAP or POP3).
Procmail sends all mail detec
On 17 Nov 2004 Alex Pleiner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* ChupaCabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-11-16 17:11]:
#:0:
#* ^Subject:.*[SPAM]
#$HOME/probably-spam/
Consider quoting the brackets:
* ^Subject: \[SPAM\]
Hopefully that will solve the problem, but in addition I
recommend that you change these
On 12 Nov 2004 Cigan Segun ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
To be specific on my question, I want to be able to scan all messages
or mails sent to & fro using yahoo or hotmail or any of these known web
based addresses!
I do not have a mail server in my local network yet.
We all use web based mails.
Can
On 7 Sep 2004 Bob Apthorpe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
[...]
If the answer is 'a WinXP user who retrieves mail via POP3 with Outlook
and who does not use the command line and does not program, not even a
little bit, and who wants a button to press to make spam go away' then
the answer is probably no
On 7 Sep 2004 Joe Emenaker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
By the same token, the point was never to be able to spot spammers by noting
who isn't using SPF. Rather, the point is to make the blacklists more
reliable. It is *only* when you use SPF in *conjunction* with
blacklists/whitelists that you se
22 matches
Mail list logo
