Hello Julian Yap,
Am 2010-10-12 10:32:39, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> NOTE: I changed the domains below to 'dot info' as the mailing list
> rejected my initial submission.
>
> I'm pretty sure it's not just me but there is some constant spamming
> from dot info domains. Perhaps for the pas
All *.cf files under that directory contain rule definitions.
How are their names chosen is not important. What is the point of your
question?
Matus, this particular point was just out of my curiosity, nothing more
than
that. I just wanted to understand the reason for prefixing file names
On Tue, 12 Oct 2010, Gnanam wrote:
Matus, this particular point was just out of my curiosity, nothing more
than that. I just wanted to understand the reason for prefixing file
names with 10,20,30,etc. when it can be just actual rule names as file
name like head_tests.cf, html_tests.cf, etc.
Hello,
I've received a spam that his both HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI and
RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED. I believe it's because both BSP and HABEAS were bought
by ReturnPath Inc.
However those two rules seems to be superflous to each other and while I can
of course manually disable them or lower the scores, I w
Thanks Karsten, I am a bit new to this so I do apologize. Here is a link
to one of the offending emails, http://drop.io/xf2ict5/asset/spam
When I try to have the Bayesian filter learn from spam in the terminal and
was to run "sa-learn --spam RANDOM_SPAM_MESSAGE" it would output as:
"Learned tokens
On 2010/10/13 12:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Hello,
I've received a spam that his both HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI and
RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED. I believe it's because both BSP and HABEAS were bought
by ReturnPath Inc.
There's good info on these rules in Bug 6247
https://issues.apache.org/SpamA
On 10/13/2010 1:26 PM, Jason Bertoch wrote:
On 2010/10/13 12:25 PM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
Hello,
I've received a spam that his both HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI and
RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED. I believe it's because both BSP and HABEAS were
bought
by ReturnPath Inc.
There's good info on these rule
On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 13:10 -0500, mdunlap wrote:
> Thanks Karsten, I am a bit new to this so I do apologize. Here is a link
> to one of the offending emails, http://drop.io/xf2ict5/asset/spam
That sample is about 980 kB large.
This would solve the first mystery -- why SA "does not recognize it a
On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 21:06 +0200, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 13:10 -0500, mdunlap wrote:
> > Thanks Karsten, I am a bit new to this so I do apologize. Here is a link
> > to one of the offending emails, http://drop.io/xf2ict5/asset/spam
>
> That sample is about 980 kB large
On Oct 13, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> I've received a spam that his both HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI and
> RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED. I believe it's because both BSP and HABEAS were bought
> by ReturnPath Inc.
>
> However those two rules seems to be superflous to each other and while
> On Oct 13, 2010, at 9:25 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
>
> > I've received a spam that his both HABEAS_ACCREDITED_SOI and
> > RCVD_IN_BSP_TRUSTED. I believe it's because both BSP and HABEAS were bought
> > by ReturnPath Inc.
> >
> > However those two rules seems to be superflous to each ot
11 matches
Mail list logo
