R - elists wrote:
>
> why not just save processor cycles & make it easier... reject the below at
> smtp time
>
> sms.ac
> fanbox.com
> fanboxnotes.com
> myfanbox.com
>
We have a ruleset here, since I want to see what they send, and your list is
inco
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
On 11/07, Kris Deugau wrote:
I'm pretty sure this is a legitimate social networking site, and I
have *definitely* received several not-spam reports from customers
for some of their emails.
How sure are you that those not-spam reports weren't wrong? It fooled me,
On 11/07, Kris Deugau wrote:
> I'm pretty sure this is a legitimate social networking site, and I
> have *definitely* received several not-spam reports from customers
> for some of their emails.
How sure are you that those not-spam reports weren't wrong? It fooled me,
until I actually talked to t
dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I'd like to get this added to the default rule set, any objections?
header FROM_MYFANBOX From:addr =~ /\@myfanbox\.com$/i
score FROM_MYFANBOX 5
I'm pretty sure this is a legitimate social networking site, and I have
*definitely* received several not-spam reports
header FROM_MYFANBOX From:addr =~ /\@myfanbox\.com$/i
We've blocked 208.69.101/24 at the SMTP level since December 2008
because of user reports about spam. To stay on this long (and this is
a very long time) means both that they keep sending and that no one
here has ever asked us to allow the
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 16:23 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
contradicts ev
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 16:23 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> > > > However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
> > > > sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
> > > > contradicts everything SA stands for.
>
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 12:47 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
contradicts e
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 12:47 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
>
> > However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
> > sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
> > contradicts everything SA stands for.
>
> I susp
John Hardin wrote:
On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
> sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
> contradicts everything SA stands for.
I suspect the corpora and the scoring logic won't mak
On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
However, John, I strongly urge you NOT to include that rule in your
sandbox for stock. This is the wrong thing to do, and basically
contradicts everything SA stands for.
I suspect the corpora and the scoring logic won't make it have much effect
a
On Sun, 2011-11-06 at 11:17 -0800, John Hardin wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
>
> > I'd like to get this added to the default rule set, any objections?
Yes, strong objections. SA is NOT a blacklist in any way.
Adding domains just like that is not what SA does. The upd
d it to my sandbox right now so we can see what happens.
>
> --
> John Hardin KA7OHZ
why not just save processor cycles & make it easier... reject the below at
smtp time
sms.ac
fanbox.com
fanboxnotes.com
myfanbox.com
you can verify MX records and such with dig
dig fanbox.com MX
etc etc
- rh
On Sun, 6 Nov 2011, dar...@chaosreigns.com wrote:
I'd like to get this added to the default rule set, any objections?
header FROM_MYFANBOX From:addr =~ /\@myfanbox\.com$/i
score FROM_MYFANBOX 5
Not at that score.
I'll add it to my sandbox right now so we can see what happens.
--
John Hardi
I'd like to get this added to the default rule set, any objections?
header FROM_MYFANBOX From:addr =~ /\@myfanbox\.com$/i
score FROM_MYFANBOX 5
I got four emails that I would have assumed were spam if they had not said
they were from a friend of mine with a very uncommon name. I eventually
comp
15 matches
Mail list logo
