--On Monday, February 16, 2009 8:57 AM +1300 Michael Hutchinson
wrote:
"plenty of people are greedy, gullible, uninformed, overly trusting,
stupid, or some combination of the above"
This also means: "Anyone that doesn't use a computer as much as an
E-Mail administrator"
Coincidentally, this
s [mailto:kpar...@ed.sc.gov]
> Sent: Saturday, 14 February 2009 9:43 a.m.
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: URI with spaces are not recognized
>
> Artificial intelligence will never overcome natural stupidity (or the
> clever ingenuity of criminals) ... if people actually DO th
in.apache.org
Subject: Re: URI with spaces are not recognized
Artificial intelligence will never overcome natural stupidity (or the
clever ingenuity of criminals) ... if people actually DO that (copy the
"url" and remove the spaces) there is some temptation to say they get
what they deserve ..
Wolfgang Zeikat a écrit :
> I think the discussion is getting carried in a direction where we are
> missing a point: spam detection.
>
exactly.
otherwise, there's no point to waste resources running SA. after all,
nobody would die for visiting a porn/casino/pharma/... site ;-p
and there's also
Hi John!
John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, February 13, 2009 18:12, John Hardin wrote:
>>> If a URI rule works, what's wrong with a body rule?
>>
>> nothing wroung making bad rules either, point is that if bad rules
>> is needed one have also bad behavin
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 15:43 -0500, Kevin Parris wrote:
> Artificial intelligence will never overcome natural stupidity (or the
> clever ingenuity of criminals) ... if people actually DO that (copy
> the "url" and remove the spaces) there is some temptation to say they
> get what they deserve ... bu
I think the discussion is getting carried in a direction where we are
missing a point: spam detection.
Kevin Parris wrote:
Artificial intelligence will never overcome natural stupidity (or the
clever ingenuity of criminals) ... if people actually DO that (copy
the "url" and remove the spaces) t
Artificial intelligence will never overcome natural stupidity (or the clever
ingenuity of criminals) ... if people actually DO that (copy the "url" and
remove the spaces) there is some temptation to say they get what they deserve
... but on the other hand most of the spam/scam stuff out there is
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, McDonald, Dan wrote:
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 11:55 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Franz Schwartau wrote:
So, does anyone know a more general solution for this kind of spam
instead of individual body rules?
You might try a rule like:
body URI_SPC_OBFU_SP
On Fri, 2009-02-13 at 11:55 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> > So, does anyone know a more general solution for this kind of spam
> > instead of individual body rules?
>
> You might try a rule like:
>
> body URI_SPC_OBFU_SPC
> /\bwww\s{1,20}\.\s{1,20}
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Fri, February 13, 2009 18:12, John Hardin wrote:
If a URI rule works, what's wrong with a body rule?
nothing wroung making bad rules either, point is that if bad rules
is needed one have also bad behaving browser problem
Why should the fact that
On Fri, February 13, 2009 20:18, Franz Schwartau wrote:
> C'mon...
france
> Patient: "Doctor, if I press down here it really hurts..."
> Doctor: "Don't press there then."
thats real life, not email
> You won't solve a problem by defining there is no problem.
where is the problem ?, 40 cm from
C'mon...
Patient: "Doctor, if I press down here it really hurts..."
Doctor: "Don't press there then."
You won't solve a problem by defining there is no problem.
In these spams people are requested to remove the spaces when entering
the given string ("url") in their browser.
Benny Pedersen wrote
Hi John,
thanks for your answer. Probably I should have written more about my
problem.
We're getting a lot of spam with obfuscated urls in the form
www . domain . net
The domain part changes quite often (about daily). The number of domains
is nearly 100 by now. Of course we have body rules for
On Fri, February 13, 2009 18:12, John Hardin wrote:
> If a URI rule works, what's wrong with a body rule?
nothing wroung making bad rules either, point is that if bad rules
is needed one have also bad behaving browser problem
--
http://localhost/ 100% uptime and 100% mirrored :)
On Fri, 13 Feb 2009, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Thu, February 12, 2009 18:26, Franz Schwartau wrote:
www . abcdef . net
Would be fine if I could use the "uri" directive
If a URI rule works, what's wrong with a body rule?
body URI_SPC_OBFU_nn /\bwww\s{1,20}\.\s{1,20}abcdef\s{1,20}\.\s{1,20}net
On Thu, February 12, 2009 18:26, Franz Schwartau wrote:
> www . abcdef . net
>
> After reading the source for a while I found that $schemelessRE in
> line 1720 of Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus.pm seems to be
> responsible for that. Unfortunally this regexp doesn't care
> about whitespaces.
gi
Hi!
A lot of spams arrives here with URI like strings containing spaces, e.g.:
www . abcdef . net
After reading the source for a while I found that $schemelessRE in line
1720 of Mail::SpamAssassin::PerMsgStatus.pm seems to be responsible for
that. Unfortunally this regexp doesn't care about whi
18 matches
Mail list logo
