On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 16:36:55 -0700, Kelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It had to happen, I suppose. This morning I received a 996 KB message
> advertising, as near as I can tell, some Taiwanese take-out restaurant.
> And by Taiwanese, I don't mean style of cooking, but *location*.
> (Yeah, next
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, David B. Funk mused:
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Nix wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, David B. Funk stated:
>> > If you -know- that the non-binary part is small/moderate, throw it at
>> > SA anyway. SA is programmed to skip over binary parts and not even try to
>> > scan their content
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Nix wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, David B. Funk stated:
> > If you -know- that the non-binary part is small/moderate, throw it at
> > SA anyway. SA is programmed to skip over binary parts and not even try to
> > scan their contents, so no loss of speed.
>
> Rawbody rules still a
> > If you -know- that the non-binary part is small/moderate, throw it at
> > SA anyway. SA is programmed to skip over binary parts and not even try
to
> > scan their contents, so no loss of speed.
>
> Rawbody rules still apply to them, don't they? That was my point.
No, I don't believe so. At le
On Fri, 3 Sep 2004, David B. Funk stated:
> If you -know- that the non-binary part is small/moderate, throw it at
> SA anyway. SA is programmed to skip over binary parts and not even try to
> scan their contents, so no loss of speed.
Rawbody rules still apply to them, don't they? That was my point
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 Kelson Vibber wrote:
> It had to happen, I suppose. This morning I received a 996 KB message
> advertising, as near as I can tell, some Taiwanese take-out restaurant.
> And by Taiwanese, I don't mean style of cooking, but *location*.
> (Yeah, next time I go to lunch I'm defin
On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] yowled:
> So I'm wondering - any ideas on dealing with giant-attachment spam?
How many of SA's rules run over non-textual attachments? (rawbody rules,
I guess... there are only 41 of those. Not many.)
It might be worthwhile arranging to have two limits, one
Title: RE: 1-Megabyte Spam
I doubt it will become cost effective for main stream spammers to send such large messages in the near future. Spammers return on a million messages is usually fairly infinitesimal and the cost of sending a million 1MB messages using hijacked home machines or
