Am Samstag, 19. Februar 2005 17:13 schrieb Matt Florido:
> Matt Florido wrote:
> > John Fleming wrote:
> >> On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
> >>> I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
> >>> know what to do with them. Do I just place them in
Matt Florido wrote:
John Fleming wrote:
On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
know what to do with them. Do I just place them in the same folder as
my local.cf and SpamAssassin will automatically use them or
Am Freitag, 18. Februar 2005 19:01 schrieb John Fleming:
> On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
> > I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
> > know what to do with them. Do I just place them in the same folder as
> > my local.cf and SpamAssassin
>I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
>know what to do with them. Do I just place them in the same folder as
>my local.cf and SpamAssassin will automatically use them or do
>I need to
>place something in a configuration file to make SpamAssassin use them?
Corre
On Friday 18 February 2005 12:53 pm, Tracey Gates wrote:
> I downloaded the .cf files from the rulesemporium.com site but I don't
> know what to do with them. Do I just place them in the same folder as
> my local.cf and SpamAssassin will automatically use them or do I need to
> place something in
ystem immediately.
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Arend [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 5:35 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: ROLEX spam
Am Freitag, 18. Februar 2005 10:11 schrieb Gray, Richard:
> Does anyone have a good ruleset for catching all t
Am Freitag, 18. Februar 2005 10:11 schrieb Gray, Richard:
> Does anyone have a good ruleset for catching all this fake watch spam?
My rules can be found here:
http://www.rulesemporium.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=329#post329
There is also a mass check with a former version.
Thomas
>
> I
Gray, Richard wrote:
Does anyone have a good ruleset for catching all this fake watch spam?
http://www.violetdreams.com/sa/rolex.cf
I'm seeing more of it in our systems here, and don't want to duplicate
effort if one of you fine people has already got one written.
someone needs to get these adopte
Richard
they tend to get caught by our general rules from the SARE
ninja's/URI-RBL etc.
what version of SA and what extra rules are you running??
--
Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300
Gray, Richard wrote:
Does anyone have a good ruleset for catchin
Does
anyone have a good ruleset for catching all this fake watch spam?
I'm
seeing more of it in our systems here, and don't want to duplicate effort if one
of you fine people has already got one written.
TIA
Richard
---
This email from
At 11:10 AM 12/3/2004, Glenn Jackman wrote:
On 2004-12-02 10:10, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 05:37 AM 12/2/2004 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
>
> >body __LW_OBREPLICA /\brepIicas?\b/i
> >body __LW_REPLICA /\breplicas?\b/i
>
> Loren..might I suggest using a lower-case I for the OB version? In some
> san
On 2004-12-02 10:10, Matt Kettler wrote:
> At 05:37 AM 12/2/2004 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
>
> >body __LW_OBREPLICA /\brepIicas?\b/i
> >body __LW_REPLICA /\breplicas?\b/i
>
> Loren..might I suggest using a lower-case I for the OB version? In some
> sans-serif fonts (ie: Arial) lower case l an
>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: How to block rolex spam
which version of spamassassin are you using?
comment out the URIBL sections and then test again
Andrew Xiang wrote:
I failed lint when I added:
spamassassin --lint
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, sk
-Level: *
That email hist enough blacklists that it should have got marked but you
raised your required score to 6.31 - and you didn't raise the blacklist
scoreing to match.
I'd add .3 to .5 to spamcop, DSBL and each of the SORBS
I see a few rolex spam in my quarantine but I&#x
At 05:37 AM 12/2/2004 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
body __LW_OBREPLICA /\brepIicas?\b/i
body __LW_REPLICA /\breplicas?\b/i
Loren..might I suggest using a lower-case I for the OB version? In some
sans-serif fonts (ie: Arial) lower case l and upper case I are drawn the
same. At first glance I thou
These are working for me. They haven't been mass-checked yet, and the
scoring may be aggressive.
body LW_ROLEX /\broll?ex\b/i
score LW_ROLEX 1
describe LW_ROLEX Mentions Rolex
body __LW_OBREPLICA /\brepIicas?\b/i
body __LW_REPLICA /\breplicas?\b/i
body __LW_WATCHES /\bwatch(?:es)?\b/i
m
On Thursday 02 December 2004 13:12, Ronald I. Nutter might have typed:
> I have been getting bombarded by spam trying to sell me Rolex watches of
> one variety or another. I have had experience writing rules as yet but
> may need to start. The following is the smtp header from one of the
> messag
I have been getting bombarded by spam trying to sell me Rolex watches of
one variety or another. I have had experience writing rules as yet but
may need to start. The following is the smtp header from one of the
messages. cleta is my server running webshield before SA gets a hold of
it on anothe
i really dont think there is a need of rolex specific ruleset, Razor,
DCC and URI checks took care of them for me.
Peter Clark wrote:
Apparently hawking Rolexes is the in thing with spammers these days.
I haven't seen any rulesets around that would help combat it, so I
wrote one.
It's availa
Hi Peter,
You use the * character in body rules. For example, you do:
body __REAL_ROLEX_REPLICA1 /real.*replica.*role.?x/i
I got badly burned doing this sort of thing early on. These rules
consume huge amounts of memory and processor time. I would do
something like this instead:
body _
On Sunday, October 24, 2004, 8:43:16 AM, Fred Bacon wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 10:19, Chris wrote:
>>
>> Peter, as shown below, network checks and the SURBL's have no problems
>> picking up the Rolex stuff:
> Ah, but it is still useful for those of us waiting for a suitable moment
> to upgra
On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 10:19, Chris wrote:
>
> Peter, as shown below, network checks and the SURBL's have no problems
> picking up the Rolex stuff:
Ah, but it is still useful for those of us waiting for a suitable moment
to upgrade from SA 2.64 to 3.0.1. The time-line at my place of work is
the
On Sunday 24 October 2004 08:35 am, Peter Clark wrote:
> Apparently hawking Rolexes is the in thing with spammers these days. I
> haven't seen any rulesets around that would help combat it, so I wrote
> one.
>
> It's available at http://www.violetdreams.com/sa/rolex.cf if anyone would
> like to t
Apparently hawking Rolexes is the in thing with spammers these days. I
haven't seen any rulesets around that would help combat it, so I wrote
one.
It's available at http://www.violetdreams.com/sa/rolex.cf if anyone would
like to try it or critique it.
It was written and tested under SA 3.0.1
24 matches
Mail list logo
