On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 11:20 -0400, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:
> Ramprasad wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 08:12 -0400, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:
> >> Ramprasad wrote:
> >>> Why not SPF ??
> >>Over two thirds of the email I receive that is UCE/Spam has an
> >> "SPF_PASS" associated with it fr
gt; List-Post: <mailto:users@spamassassin.apache.org>
>> List-Id:
>> Delivered-To: mailing list users@spamassassin.apache.org
>> X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=
>> Subject: Re: Earthlink emails
>> From: Ramprasad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
Ramprasad wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 08:12 -0400, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:
>> Ramprasad wrote:
>>> Why not SPF ??
>> Over two thirds of the email I receive that is UCE/Spam has an
>> "SPF_PASS" associated with it from SA. All SPF seems to do is make the
>> "stupid" spammers look more
On Fri, 2006-09-29 at 08:12 -0400, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:
> Ramprasad wrote:
> >
> > Why not SPF ??
>
> Over two thirds of the email I receive that is UCE/Spam has an
> "SPF_PASS" associated with it from SA. All SPF seems to do is make the
> "stupid" spammers look more stupid. The c
Ramprasad wrote:
>
> Why not SPF ??
Over two thirds of the email I receive that is UCE/Spam has an
"SPF_PASS" associated with it from SA. All SPF seems to do is make the
"stupid" spammers look more stupid. The clever ones aren't affected.
> DK is a resource HOG. And I cant do that ea
"Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SPF can be a pain for a number of reasons that have been discussed
> endlessly. I suspect Dirtlink found them to be effectively useless.
>
> Why not try using domainkeys instead?
SPF and domainkeys protect different things and therefore serve
differen
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 11:05 -0700, Loren Wilton wrote:
> > Apparently they have removed SPF records after publishing them once.
> > Thats a stupid idea IMHO. Today I am forced to TEMP FAIL earthlink ids
> > whenever there is a spam attack on my servers
>
> SPF can be a pain for a number of reasons
On Thu, 2006-09-28 at 19:11 -0700, jdow wrote:
> From: "Ramprasad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 21:28 -0700, jdow wrote:
> >> Before you blame Earthlink note that it has NOT gone through Earthlink
> >> servers.
> >>
> >> relay2.corp.good-sam.com is the receiving email server.
>
From: "Ramprasad" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 21:28 -0700, jdow wrote:
Before you blame Earthlink note that it has NOT gone through Earthlink
servers.
relay2.corp.good-sam.com is the receiving email server.
It's a forged email, at a guess. (It also has mangled headers. Newlines
Apparently they have removed SPF records after publishing them once.
Thats a stupid idea IMHO. Today I am forced to TEMP FAIL earthlink ids
whenever there is a spam attack on my servers
SPF can be a pain for a number of reasons that have been discussed
endlessly. I suspect Dirtlink found them
On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 21:28 -0700, jdow wrote:
> Before you blame Earthlink note that it has NOT gone through Earthlink
> servers.
>
> relay2.corp.good-sam.com is the receiving email server.
>
> It's a forged email, at a guess. (It also has mangled headers. Newlines
> are missing. MAYBE it would
ity:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
{^_^}
- Original Message -
From: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 20:17
Subject: Re: Earthlink emails
Received: from SHERI-PTIN5DJM8 (cpe-74-71-30-143.twcny.res.rr.com
[74.71.30.1
Before you blame Earthlink note that it has NOT gone through Earthlink
servers.
relay2.corp.good-sam.com is the receiving email server.
It's a forged email, at a guess. (It also has mangled headers. Newlines
are missing. MAYBE it would do better if you sent it plain text. HTML
tends to mangle th
> Received: from SHERI-PTIN5DJM8
(cpe-74-71-30-143.twcny.res.rr.com [74.71.30.143])
That mail came from a RoadRunner zombie account in
Minnesota, has nothing to do with Earthlink other than the forged
headers.
If that is the entire message, and there isn't an
image attached, they might
On Tue, September 26, 2006 18:44, Gino Cerullo wrote:
>> update to 3.1.5 if posible
>> and enable spf check
> How does this help? Earthlink does not publish SPF records.
sorry i was to fast here :/
--
"This message was sent using 100% recycled spam mails."
On 26-Sep-06, at 12:43 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Tue, September 26, 2006 18:24, bryan haase wrote:
I am getting a lot of earthlink.net emails with 4-5 random words
in the body. I am at a
lost how to prevent these. Any suggestions??
http://openspf.org/wizard.html?mydomain=earthlink.net
On Tue, September 26, 2006 18:24, bryan haase wrote:
> I am getting a lot of earthlink.net emails with 4-5 random words in the body.
> I am at a
> lost how to prevent these. Any suggestions??
http://openspf.org/wizard.html?mydomain=earthlink.net
> SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on relay2.corp.
bryan haase wrote:
I am getting a lot of earthlink.net emails with 4-5 random words in the
body. I am at a lost how to prevent these. Any suggestions??
Thanks
Bryan
Subject:
axiom closure advocacy
may I suggest you start with upgrading your SA to 3.1.5 which will solve
security issues
18 matches
Mail list logo
