nt: Friday, June 29, 2007 10:59 AM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
>
> On Friday 29 June 2007 12:41, Don O'Neil wrote:
> > I've been getting these messages fairly regularly lately. We're
> > running SA
> >
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: FW: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
On Friday 29 June 2007 12:41, Don O'Neil wrote:
> I've been getting these messages fairly regularly lately. We're
> running SA
> 3.1.8 and Exim 4.6.6 on FreeBSD 6.1. I'
On Friday 29 June 2007 12:41, Don O'Neil wrote:
> I've been getting these messages fairly regularly lately. We're running SA
> 3.1.8 and Exim 4.6.6 on FreeBSD 6.1. I've changed the exim->SA config to go
> through a pipe rather than the traditional way, set it to only scan
> messages <100K, turned o
I've been getting these messages fairly regularly lately. We're running SA
3.1.8 and Exim 4.6.6 on FreeBSD 6.1. I've changed the exim->SA config to go
through a pipe rather than the traditional way, set it to only scan messages
<100K, turned off Bayes AutoLearn because it was creating token files i
. I could use SMTP auth
but it's just simpler this way.
From: snowjack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 9/21/2004 1:13 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: What the Hell? Fw: Mail delivery failed: returning message to
sender
It is
jdow wrote:
> From: "Bob Apthorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>> A quick check of http://dsbl.org/listing?ip=207.217.120.116 shows
>> earthlink's server being listed for being a single-hop open relays
>> and insecure formmail scripts. Looks like earthlink relays for
>> o1.com users; you may want to
morticia wrote:
I wish they'd use it and make it the default. But I do not wish to pay
even more for my account because of the increased stupid luser support
calls that would generate. Getting plain old dialup or DSL working is
beyond most people. And many of them do not want to use something speci
From: "snowjack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> jdow wrote:
> > My understanding is that Earthlink servers are "open" so that people
> > who are mobile can still send mail through their Earthlink accounts.
> > The way they handle the spam issue is a tarpit operation. The more
> > mails you send in a given
jdow wrote:
My understanding is that Earthlink servers are "open" so that people
who are mobile can still send mail through their Earthlink accounts.
The way they handle the spam issue is a tarpit operation. The more
mails you send in a given interval the slower the mail processes. So
Earthlink mai
To be fair to the blacklisters,
There are many ways to authenticate smtp before allowing remote senders. Perhaps Earthlink does use its own method, but maybe it is just not doing enough.
On Tue, 2004-09-21 at 15:06, jdow wrote:
From: "Bob Apthorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> A quick check of h
From: "Bob Apthorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> A quick check of http://dsbl.org/listing?ip=207.217.120.116 shows
> earthlink's server being listed for being a single-hop open relays and
> insecure formmail scripts. Looks like earthlink relays for o1.com users;
> you may want to ask DSBL how trusted t
Hi,
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 02:16:58 -0700 "jdow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apache is using a DoS tool as a blacklist?
>
> Send email from your ISP to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and watch the
> results. They say one email to that address is sufficient to cause
> the entire relay path to be marked as spamm
Apache is using a DoS tool as a blacklist?
Send email from your ISP to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and watch the
results. They say one email to that address is sufficient to cause
the entire relay path to be marked as spammers.
{+_+}
- Original Message -
From: "Mail Delivery System" <[EMAIL PROTEC
13 matches
Mail list logo
