On Jun 30, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
> John Hardin wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
>>
>>> I have been experiencing a huge amount of spam getting through to some big
>>> target addresses, mainly from .eu and .info addresses, and would like to
>>> see
John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
I have been experiencing a huge amount of spam getting through to
some big target addresses, mainly from .eu and .info addresses, and
would like to see if someone can find something wrong with my setup.
I recently upgraded to 3
On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
I have been experiencing a huge amount of spam getting through to some big
target addresses, mainly from .eu and .info addresses, and would like to see
if someone can find something wrong with my setup. I recently upgraded to
3.4, but still the sa
Hi Steven,
It is realy worth, to filter this with spamassassin?
I get per day over 4 of them... and filter it easyly from procmail
since the messages are always generated by the same software.
:0B
* contains a virus which has
.ATTENTION.Anti_Virus_Spam/
Thanks, Greetings and ni
- Original Message -
From: "mouss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:27 PM
Subject: Re: Lots of spam with the following snip
Justin Mason wrote:
[snip]
On 01.07.08 10:50, Justin Mason wrote:
no -- this is real spam, not a bounce in any way.
Justin Mason wrote:
[snip]
On 01.07.08 10:50, Justin Mason wrote:
no -- this is real spam, not a bounce in any way.
same here. not a bounce in any way.
Are you sure it's not just virus message sent by someone and cured by
intermediate relay?
Yes, seeing lots of this exact
Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
> > > On 30.06.08 19:04, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> > > > God dag,
> > > >
> > > > ***
> > > > Warning!
> > > > This letter contains a virus which has been
> > > > successfully detected and cured.
> > > > ***
> > > >
> > > > The part that's noteworthy is this:
> >
> > On 30.06.08 19:04, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> > > God dag,
> > >
> > > ***
> > > Warning!
> > > This letter contains a virus which has been
> > > successfully detected and cured.
> > > ***
> > >
> > > The part that's noteworthy is this:
> > >
> > >
> > > ***
> > > Warning!
> > > This letter
Matus UHLAR - fantomas writes:
> On 30.06.08 19:04, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> >
> > God dag,
> >
> > ***
> > Warning!
> > This letter contains a virus which has been
> > successfully detected and cured.
> > ***
> >
> > The part that's noteworthy is this:
> >
> >
> > ***
> > Warning!
> > This
On 30.06.08 19:04, Steven W. Orr wrote:
>
> God dag,
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully detected and cured.
> ***
>
> The part that's noteworthy is this:
>
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully detected
On Monday 30 June 2008 6:04 pm, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> God dag,
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully detected and cured.
> ***
>
> The part that's noteworthy is this:
>
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully de
On Monday 30 June 2008 6:04 pm, Steven W. Orr wrote:
> God dag,
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully detected and cured.
> ***
>
> The part that's noteworthy is this:
>
>
> ***
> Warning!
> This letter contains a virus which has been
> successfully de
On Tuesday 26 February 2008 6:15 am, Tarak Ranjan wrote:
> Hi List,
> i have posted my RAW email in http://pastebin.ca/918849 ,
> i'm receiving 1000 to 4000 per day this king of mesages.
> SA also skipping this kind of mails
>
> /
> TArak
Here's how my box scored it:
Content analysis details:
I use these rules. Score as you see fit. Mind the linebreaks...
body HC_GIRL/\bnice girl that would like to chat.{1,16}Email
me at \
.{1,32}\.info.{1,120}\bpic(ture)?s\b/
describe HC_GIRLGirl with pics scam
scoreHC_GIRL5
body HC_GIRL2 /I am (?:using|wri
Hi List,
i have posted my RAW email in http://pastebin.ca/918849 ,
i'm receiving 1000 to 4000 per day this king of mesages.
SA also skipping this kind of mails
"Nice girl" spam. Look in the archives over the last week, those were
discussed a lot and several rules posted for them.
Hi,
I score it as follows :-
Content analysis details: (23.1 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
-- --
3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100%
Tarak Ranjan wrote:
> > Hi List,
> > i have posted my RAW email in http://pastebin.ca/918849 ,
> > i'm receiving 1000 to 4000 per day this king of mesages.
> > SA also skipping this kind of mails
> >
> > /
> > TArak
> >
> >
I get 8.2 without Bayes...
1.5 IXHASH2BODY: mail has
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 10:28 -0200, Luis Hernán Otegui wrote:
> Hi, tarak
>
> 2008/2/26, Tarak Ranjan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Hi List,
> > i have posted my RAW email in http://pastebin.ca/918849 ,
> > i'm receiving 1000 to 4000 per day this king of mesages.
> > SA also skipping this kind of ma
Hi, tarak
2008/2/26, Tarak Ranjan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi List,
> i have posted my RAW email in http://pastebin.ca/918849 ,
> i'm receiving 1000 to 4000 per day this king of mesages.
> SA also skipping this kind of mails
>
> /
Well, I get a beautiful BAYES_99 on the mail you've shown. Y
> I have searched around rulesemporium without much success trying to find
> these LOCAL_OBFU_* rules. I don't suppose you could tell me the
> filename that they occur in could you? (I assume they will be in
> /etc/mail/Spamassassin or wherever your local.cf file is for your
> install).
Sorry, fo
ail a day.
Thanks again,
Darren
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13 January 2005 09:53
> To: SpamAssassin Users
> Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
> rules
>
> On Thursday, January
On Thursday, January 13, 2005, 1:19:58 AM, Darren Coleman wrote:
>> From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> % dig 2.0.0.127.sbl.spamhaus.org a
>>
>> ; <<>> DiG 8.3 <<>> 2.0.0.127.sbl.spamhaus.org a
>> ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch
>> ;; got answer:
>> ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUER
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 13 January 2005 01:07
> To: Jeff Chan
> Cc: Darren Coleman; Jack L. Stone; Loren Wilton;
> users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
Rul
On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, 4:57:57 PM, Jeff Chan wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, 8:15:12 AM, Darren Coleman wrote:
>> Figured out why URIBL_SBL wasn't firing for me for that email - I can't
>> even resolve that domain! Have tried resolving it on several machines I
>> have shell acces
On Wednesday, January 12, 2005, 8:15:12 AM, Darren Coleman wrote:
> Figured out why URIBL_SBL wasn't firing for me for that email - I can't
> even resolve that domain! Have tried resolving it on several machines I
> have shell access to (including external machines who peer with
> different provid
Darren Coleman wrote:
Hi Loren,
Firstly, thanks for your help.
I have searched around rulesemporium without much success trying to find
these LOCAL_OBFU_* rules. I don't suppose you could tell me the
filename that they occur in could you? (I assume they will be in
/etc/mail/Spamassassin or whereve
Christopher John Shaker wrote:
In my useage, SpamAssassin 3.0.2 works *way* better than the 2.XX
versions of
SpamAssassin. I've been training my Baysian filters, and they work
really well now.
SA 3.0.2 works so well that I've deleted most of my apx 400 local rules,
which plugged
leaks through S
ker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Jack L. Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of RulesEmp
rules
At 04:36 AM
> -Original Message-
> From: Darren Coleman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 January 2005 15:29
> To: Jack L. Stone; Loren Wilton; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
> rules
>
> Hmm..
>
&g
anuary 2005 14:55
> To: Loren Wilton; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
> rules
>
> At 04:36 AM 1.12.2005 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
> >Well, just for grins I ran it here:
> >
> >Content analysi
At 04:36 AM 1.12.2005 -0800, Loren Wilton wrote:
>Well, just for grins I ran it here:
>
>Content analysis details: (11.3 points, 4.6 required)
>
> pts rule name description
> --
>--
> 2.6 LOCAL_OBFU_TADALAFIL_SU
al.cf file is for your
install).
Thanks,
Darren
> -Original Message-
> From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 12 January 2005 12:37
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lots of spam being missed with SA 3.0.2 + lots of
RulesEmp
> rules
>
&g
Loren Wilton wrote:
Well, just for grins I ran it here:
Content analysis details: (11.3 points, 4.6 required)
pts rule name description
--
--
2.6 LOCAL_OBFU_TADALAFIL_SUBJ Obfuscated 'TADALAFIL' in subject
0
Well, just for grins I ran it here:
Content analysis details: (11.3 points, 4.6 required)
pts rule name description
--
--
2.6 LOCAL_OBFU_TADALAFIL_SUBJ Obfuscated 'TADALAFIL' in subject
0.3 SARE_WEOFFER
34 matches
Mail list logo
