ge? Sendmail milter with Mimedefang etc allows you to do this.
Cheers,
Aaron
>
> --
> John Hardin KA7OHZICQ#15735746http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]FALaholic #11174pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED
f you are
> not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have received this communication in error, please erase all copies
> of the message and its attachments and notify us immediately.
> Thank you!
> [attachment "doug.vcf" deleted by Aaron Browne/Barwon]
but I have had a lot
> of gigo since then.
>
> Thanks for any help
>
> <> I use procmail with great success. I also use the SpamAssassin
> ClamAV plugin. (See plugins on the wiki.)
>
> {^_^}
I run SpamAssassin via MimeDefang.
Is there anything in particular you are having problems with?
Cheers,
Aaron
tten for administration purposes and to
track down emails when there is a complaint or query.
So by default we keep everything and provide mechanisms for our staff
to recover an email if required.
The ability to customise SpamAssassin and Mimedefang has been invaluable
for us.
Cheers,
Aaron
thenticated SMTP/TLS through the 'cmail' host, how can I prevent it from
hitting the PBL?
Thanks,
Aaron
---
Aaron Bennett
Manager of Systems Administration
Clark University ITS
turn that on, can I write a rule based
on it, or will SA pick up on it automatically?
Thanks,
Aaron
> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:t...@ipinc.net]
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2010 12:20 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: preventing authenticated smtp users from triggering PBL
>
> why are you using authenticated SMTP from trusted networks?
>
> T
retty good.
Regards,
David.
---
We use it here; I've got a little python script that parses out recent entries
from that project and builds a simple postfix static map to block mail attempts
to them. I'm happy to share if anyone's interested.
- Aaron Bennett
Manage
I've been using SA 2.6x to block spam at our site for some time. With the
release of 3.0.1 I decided to upgrade. Unfortunately, once the upgrade was
complete I found that my test e-mails were marked as spam. I also received
several false positives from end-users as well. I could understand some
nd how it works. Why
doesn't it like my address? Also, why does it like me so much less under
3.0.1 than it did under 2.64?
> -Original Message-
> From: Aaron Grewell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 1:55 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache
Nevermind. I found it in the list archives.
> -Original Message-
> From: Aaron Grewell
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 3:03 PM
> To: Aaron Grewell; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Understanding the AWL (was Upgrade to 3.0.1 results
> in false positiv
sure trove of information.
That's where the answer ultimately came from. It was linked in one of the
posts on the topic. In fact, the Wiki entry it says you wrote it. So
thanks for the info! :)
-Aaron
If you're using Exchange/Outlook, just use a public folder. Give the
users write-only access and let them drag and drop it in. Works great.
On Thu, 2005-01-06 at 08:44 -0500, Jason Gauthier wrote:
> Neat! I was just thinking about how to do that myself.
> But, I use exchange, so I'm not sure how
ven when you ssh into the box or is this only seen
when viewing the console?
Aaron
> I highly doubt a MS product would take advantage of results
> from another product. That's a very un-Microsoft thing to do.
> Usualy if MS produces a product in a market, they want you to
> use their solution exclusively.
>
> >Does anyone have any real exposure to IMF especially with
> int
to fix it. CPAN has spoiled me, I
hate back-revving from source. :)
-Aaron
I use Thunderbird to download the messages from Exchange via IMAP. I create
local folders (making sure to set Thunderbird for MBOX format) and then copy
to the local folders, one for Spam and one for Ham. Then I go into the
profile, grab the mbox files, and upload to the server for import. This
On 8/10/07, Jonn R Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jerry Durand wrote:
> > At 01:28 PM 8/10/2007, Igor Chudov wrote:
> >> I am considering a local deal related to hosting by Comcast cable
> >> (8mbps down, 1 mbps up).
> >>
> >> I am concerned, however, with me sending email and being on comca
s not available, you will simply lose mail from some
senders. It's entirely their "fault" for violating the RFCs but the
mail is still lost, and it isn't easy to explain whats going on to
your users/customers. Greylisting gives me about the same effect but
it works with a bigger percentage of borken servers and I can easily
exclude broken mailservers if needed.
-Aaron
;fault" for violating the RFCs but the
> > mail is still lost, and it isn't easy to explain whats going on to
> > your users/customers. Greylisting gives me about the same effect but
> > it works with a bigger percentage of borken servers and I can easily
> > exc
ect filtering only, or full content
filtering with SA. A surprising number prefer to use just the more
basic checks and deal with what gets through with their mua.
-Aaron
On 8/16/07, Dave Mifsud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 16/08/07 08:45, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
> > I agree and have yet another similar setup here. We reject about 80%
> > as well, which helps reduce the load on the servers and on the users
> > who manage their quarantine
On 8/16/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> OK - it's interesting that of all of you who responded this is the only
> person who is doing it right. I have to say that I'm somewhat surprised that
> so few people are preprocessing their email to reduce the SA load. As we all
> know SA is
Just take away the scores for the individual RBLs, and your yellow
list as another RBL, and use metarules to score.
-Aaron
On 8/18/07, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have what I call a yellow list which is a list of IP addresses of
> hosts like yahoo, google, hotma
On 8/22/07, Rense Buijen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot all, it's all clear to me now!
> I though that the trusted networks mean that the message will just be
> passed it it came from that source.
> I didnt know it will skip to the next "Received" IP. Thanks a lot.
>
> One question abo
27;re not getting flooded with complaints. I tried it with a
single small domain (less than 30 mailboxes) and didn't make it 2 business
days.
We'd all like to find that magic button to stop spam, but this aint it.
-Aaron
smtpd_timeout = 45s
>
>
> Some people are even using 10 seconds, which seems short to me. The RFC
> requires 300 seconds.
>
> Jeff C.
>
Same problem here on several servers. Reducing the timeout helps, but
violates RFC and is simply reducing the effects rather than fixing the
issue. Is there any RFC valid way for a server to hang up on a client,
especially after a 5xx?
-Aaron
>
At my site we operate under the presumption that SpamAssassin should be
avoided if at all possible because it is so expensive on our resources
compared to some other easy checks. This helps us to deal with DoS and
"surges" from retarded bots quite well (so far at least).
We reduce the messages bound for SA to less than 10% of our traffic by a
combination of postfix UCE checks, a couple very accurate RBLs, selective
greylisting and our own whitelist. When the surges/DOS happen, they tend to
increase the number of messages thrown away but rarely effect the volume
running through SA.
-Aaron
and they usually let me know pretty quickly when there's a problem. I do
use dnswl.org to whitelist before RBLs. You might still not want to use
spamcop to reject if you're paranoid (and I'll agree they've been overly
agressive in the past), but I think it's very safe to use in SA.
btw this article is what convinced me to give spamcop a second look:
http://www.dnsbl.com/2007/05/spamcop-bl-another-look-its-accurate.html
-Aaron
On 10/9/07, R.Smits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Which spam blacklists do you use in your MTA config. (postfix)
> smptd_client_restrictions
>
> Currently we only use : reject_rbl_client list.dsbl.org
>
> We let spamassassin fight the rest of the spam. But the load of spam is
> getting
g here)... the
proponents seem to be actually using nolisting and claiming no
problems, whilst those against the idea seem to be predicting problems
rather than reporting on actual issues they have experienced.
-Aaron
This combination creates a highly reliable blacklist and
> I'm currently tracking about 1.1 million virus infected spambots that
> have tried to spam me in the last 4 days.
>
> It's my hostkarma list.
>
>
Sounds interesting.. do you block based on this list or just use it
for scoring in SA or something like that? What is the false positve
rate?
-Aaron
>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Steve Radich wrote:
> > Sorry; apparently I was unclear.
> &
th this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
#51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
# hacked up to query hostkama
# by aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
use strict;
use IO::Handle;
use
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Henrik K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 03:00:49PM -0500, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:50 PM, Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Marc Perkel wrote:
> > > > It appears
real accounts. The scanner would end up biased
towards whatever junk the spammers desperate enough to use
dictionaries send, which would drown out the stats from those spams
that are actually difficult to detect.
Why do you accept messages for non existent accounts? You're wasting
bandwidth, regardless of what you do or don't do with the junk after
you accept it. From the sound of it you could reduce your mail
bandwidth to a tiny fraction of what it is now by just refusing this
stuff (which is what most everyone else does, AFAIK).
-Aaron
s here for about a month. While there are
certainly some FPs (do not use it as a blocklist!), I've been using it
to add a small amount to the spam score with decent results. There
are a number of messages that get pushed over the threshold thanks to
hits on hostkarma. I deal with US mail primarily, maybe that is the
difference.
-Aaron
It seems like relays.ordb.org (long dead) has started returning
positive answers for *all* IPs.
Today I've had several clients with old configs which still had this
RBL in them suddenly start blocking everything.
Is this a new thing? Maybe the maintainers were tired of all the queries.
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>
> > It seems like relays.ordb.org (long dead) has started returning
> > positive answers for *all* IPs.
> > Today I've had several clients with old configs
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:50 PM, John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mouss wrote:
> > ajx wrote:
> >> It seems your logic is fundamentally flawed for several reasons. By
> >> returning false positives, you're breaking mail gateways that use this
> >> once
> >> useful service. On the contr
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 2:23 AM, Dave Funk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008, John Rudd wrote:
>
> > Aaron Wolfe wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:50 PM, John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> A postmaster who doe
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM, mouss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> nws.charlie wrote:
> > I guess I'm one of the mail admin wannabe's... not by choice, but by
> > inheritance. It was turned over to me with almost zero training or
> > experience. :(
> > I found the initial posts clear, and had
have any idea why its doing this? The user1 .spamassassin
folder is chown user1.user and has permissions 700. Are the permissions
a problem?
I see there is a --spam-db option. Do I need to use this?
--
Aaron Axelsen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Great hosting, low prices. Modevia Web Services LLC
still tries to learn as root
Is there some reason for this? Any suggestions?
-- Aaron
Matt Kettler wrote:
> Aaron Axelsen wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am trying to run a cronjob as root which will learn a different
>> accounts spam into my spam db. Example command:
m I doing wrong? I've done a lot of googling
but have had no luck with getting any useful results. I was hoping someone on
this list is familiar with the Bayes token DB's and could point me to why it's
not working this time.
Thanks!
Aaron
and my sanity appreciate that. :)
Aaron
- Original Message -
From: "Theo Van Dinter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: Bayesian DB problem?
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 12:44:42PM -0400, Aaron Hill wrote:
bayes_path /etc/spamassa
ify a restart script, make sure it restarts both amavisd and postfix.
Otherwise the two can stop talking to each other, and your mail will get
held up until you restart postfix and flush the queue. This may be unique
to my configuration, but if so I'm not sure of the cause.
-Aaron
r rules yet, much easier than writing custom rules.
Bayes hasn't given any false positives that I'm aware of in the last year,
despite the theoretical skew that ought to be introduced by using everyone's
Spam and only my Ham. I cannot tell you why, but it works and it works
well.
Aaron Grewell
Network Administrator
University of Washington Bothell
> Seems to me like setting up a firewall or network logger should make it
pretty
> easy to see what is sending out inordinate amounts of traffic on port 25.
Or
> you could just block port 25 outgoing as a matter of policy and force
people
> to go out through the university mail servers. No one
step set-up process, but this isn't
exactly what I'm looking for. Does anyone know of a compiled API version of
SpamAssassin that would allow a programmer to simply add the library to an
application, and call it through API?
Any ideas would be appreciated!
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
7;ve reaped the benefits for years on my own server. Just an niggling
annoyance that we won't be able to use it here at the facility because of
the install complexity.
If anyone's working on any sort of port, or compile of this sort, I'd be
willing to pitch in a $50 donation toward
step through, personally. :)
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
-Original Message-
From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 2:27 PM
To: 'SpamAssassin'
Subject: Re: Newbie looking for info...
> Personally, I use SpamAssassin on my per
Title: Message
On a side note, is
anyone very familiar with any protocols involving public blacklists? I'm
looking for the ability to simply toss an IP at a site somewhere, and get a
simple 'yes/no' response as to whether or not it's a spam
IP?
-Aaron
Boyles
ITC Applications
Programmer
ny way of tracking down who the
jokester is, you might want to remove him from the forum all together.
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
This sounds along the lines of what I'm looking for. Is there an RFC on
this protocol anywhere, and a list of some free servers hosting the
information?
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, Dec
Ahh, thanks for the info. I'll keep 'em on ignore then. ;)
-Original Message-
From: List Mail User [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 3:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does "tuxorama.com" sound
0.221.33.80.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org" and nab the response. However, when I
attempt this, I always get the same thing in response: "Can't find server
name for address 10.0.0.1" which is our gateway. Am I doing something
wrong, or does this simply not work if my DNS is going through
rth. :/
Maybe there's another option?
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:34 PM
To: Aaron Boyles
Cc: SpamAssassin
Subject: Re: Public Blacklists?
Aaron Boyles wrote:
Thus, if I wanted to check IP 80.22.221.70
My guess would be "yes," though I don't have any DNS servers handy to do an
external check on.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Mike Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:59 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: Re: Public Blacklists?
>
without
asking the moderators of the list to simply remove you.)
> What do others think?
I think you're a childish troll. You asked.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 7:00 PM
To: users@spamassassin.
of a 250 - Okay.
Is that what you mean?
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Rick Macdougall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 6:24 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: sender-valid SMTP callbacks (Re: Does "tuxorama.com" sound
familiar to
er, then having THAT
forward it on to the Exchange server. Again, keep in mind that I'm trying
to keep this as ridiculously simple as possible for the people that'll have
to actually implement it in my absence.
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
tle story, so that's what brought me
here. All things said and done, it sounds like we've had it pretty easy so
far. Then again, when you're only processing 500 E-Mails a day, I suppose
we just don't see enough volume that we would've even noticed some of the
problems you
A number of people have mentioned that... But what is it? It's not a
command my PC recognizes.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: SM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:09 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: Public Blacklists?
Hi Aaron,
At 13:14 21-12-2005,
: Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:24 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: Public Blacklists?
Aaron Boyles wrote:
> A number of people have mentioned that... But what is it? It's not a
> command my PC recognizes.
>
> From: SM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > nslookup is brok
Perhaps I'm just using/configuring it wrong?
I assumed that typing: dig www.yahoo.com
At the command prompt should have SOMETHING result. Instead, I get the time
out.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Steven Manross [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:
Maybe I'm not understanding how this is supposed to work. Does Bind need to
be installed in order for Dig to work? And what IS Bind?
-Original Message-
From: Aaron Boyles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:25 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: P
with any
app using it? And what's the air-speed velocity of a laden swallow?
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: SM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:05 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: Public Blacklists?
Hi Aaron,
At 11:24 22-12-2005, Aaron Boyles
Not to me, unfortunately... I'm just a contractor... :D
-Original Message-
From: Dallas L. Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:33 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: Public Blacklists?
> -Original Message-
> From: Aaron Boyles [ma
Well... I don't know that!
Ahh..!
-Original Message-
From: Jim Maul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 4:01 PM
To: Aaron Boyles
Cc: SpamAssassin
Subject: [Heading into OT land] Re: Public Blacklists?
Aaron Boyles wrote:
> :o Th
Ah, excellent! Thanks for all your help!
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: SM [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 4:53 PM
To: SpamAssassin
Subject: RE: Public Blacklists?
Hi Aaron,
At 12:10 22-12-2005, Aaron Boyles wrote:
>:o That seems to have worked! So
So far, so good. Everything I'm trying gives me an NXDOMAIN response,
though. Anyone have a couple of IPs that are on Spamhaus that I could use
for testing purposes?
-Aaron Boyles
ITC Applications Programmer
ll.
Anyone care to refresh my memory as to what they mean?
While I'm thinking about it, I should check our own domain and see if we got
added to any of these lists when the hackers had ahold of us. :/
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Dallas L. Engelken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ry good feature added to my filter app. In
appreciation, I'll be donating $50 to the ASF. Thank you very much for the
hand-holding for the past two days! It's too bad more open source projects
don't have such patient communities.
-Aaron Boyles
-Original Message-
Fro
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 1:42 AM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 16-Mar-2009, at 16:40, Chris wrote:
>>
>> -8.0 HABEAS_ACCREDITED_COI RBL: Habeas Accredited Confirmed Opt-In or
>> Better
>> [208.82.16.109 listed in
>
>
> I changed my HABEAS scores ages ago:
;m seriously considering changing them to 1.0, 0.01, and 0, respectively.
>> >
>> > I seem to ONLY see the headers in spam messages. It's a shame the defaults
>> > in SA are still set absurd values.
>
> On 17.03.09 02:25, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>> Funny, I mentioned t
ese mechanisms
work, but surely you could emulate them or use their reporting systems
as an example. The code is open source.
Good luck,
Aaron
> --
> J.D. Falk
> Return Path Inc
> http://www.returnpath.net/
>
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Mark wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Hepworth [mailto:max...@gmail.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 31 maart 2009 20:56
> To: hlug090...@buzzhost.co.uk
> Cc: Rejaine Monteiro; Spamassassin list
> Subject: Re: zen.spamhaus.org
>
>> Err no.
>>
>> spamhaus is g
clear.
If your mail just isn't important then maybe it's a neat thing, but
considering how easy it is to set up a working local DNS, I just don't
see the value.
-Aaron
> Allow users to create child networks
>
> Enable stats and logs
>
> Enable typo correction
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM, DAve wrote:
> Marc Perkel wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> My blacklist hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com is rising in the charts. Here's
>> a blacklist comparison chart.
>>
>> http://www.sdsc.edu/~jeff/spam/cbc.html
>>
>
> Those results differ wildly with my stats ove
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Marc Perkel wrote:
>
>
> option8 wrote:
>>
>> on my small server setup, i host around 30 domains. between SA and a
>> fairly
>> aggressive exim setup, very little spam gets through to the end users.
>> most
>> of it doesn't even get far enough to hit my logs.
>>
>>
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:06 AM, McDonald, Dan
wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 14:14 +0200, Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote:
>> Greetings.
>> I'm thinking of implementing:
>> - greylisting
>
> very effective. I cut my incoming mail by about 80% when we put up
> greylisting. I'm using sqlgrey.
>
>> -
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 2:39 AM,
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> I'm probably missing something here - but Constant Contact (who we block
> by IP) have been a nagging source of spam for us. I'm just wondering why
Could you share your IP list? I'd like to block these clowns too (and
I'm lazy).
>
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 5:06 AM, Justin Mason wrote:
> I've heard that they are diligent about terminating abusive clients.
> Are you reporting these spams to them?
>
> --j.
>
>From what I've seen, most of the traffic from them probably doesn't
qualify as spam by the common definition. It is, howe
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:11 AM,
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 12:06 +0200, Yet Another Ninja wrote:
>> On 7/3/2009 11:14 AM, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 10:06 +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
>> >> I've heard that they are diligent about terminating ab
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Mike
Cardwell wrote:
> Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>
>> I think the point was that the URIBL's are never going to be listing
>> these domains, so why waste time looking them up
>
> m...@haven:~$ host constantcontact.com.multi.uribl.com
> con
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Michael Grant wrote:
> In defense of Constant Contact, they are in the business of sending
> out mailings for people, they are not themselves spammers. They
> perform a service and they do it as best they can given the
> circumstances in which they work.
>
arms de
+1 for ending this thread
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 2:25 PM,
rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> From:
> Chris Owen
> To:
> rich...@buzzhost.co.uk
> Cc:
> Tara Natanson
> Subject:
> Re:
suggestion about raising the RCVD_IN_PBL
score? I was thinking of raising it as high as 2 or 3. Another thing
I'm considering is a META rule that scores for PBL + BAYES_60, etc.
I am generally reluctant to mess much with the default scoring -- but
I'm always looking for a better se
Funny that a request for forums would come from nabble... If nabble
users are any indication of what a forum would be like, I think it's
pretty obvious that posting quality would be crap.
Just my $0.02.
-Aaron
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Any-one-interested-in-using-a-proper-forum--tp24697144p24697144.html
> Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:01 PM, ktn wrote:
>
> Actually I think Nabble is great for those of us who can't handle the traffic
> of the whole mailing list.
>
This list generates less than 50 messages per day on average:
http://gmane.org/plot-rate.php/plot.png?group=gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.g
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:07 PM, John Rudd wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 17:54, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 5:01 PM, ktn wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually I think Nabble is great for those of us who can't handle the
>>> traffic
>>&
the checks in front of them, including Spamhaus. That's massive.
Barracuda is not used by a majority of clients and is used after the
others, so the low number is not an indication of poor performance.
I've actually had pretty good luck with it.
-Aaron
> --
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:39 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 14-Aug-2009, at 18:44, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>>
>> The Spamhaus Block List 21.87% (6.74%) 18405091
>> The Invaluement SIP Block List 22.14% (5.33%) 14557404
>
>
> What w
2009/9/18 Karsten Bräckelmann :
> On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 09:48 +1200, Jason Haar wrote:
>> On 09/19/2009 09:13 AM, Jose Luis Marin Perez wrote:
>> > For more than 1 emails a day how much memory should be the server?
>> > as one can calculate the amount of memory needed?
>>
>> 10,000 a day means
e online. If the OP were to follow one of them to the letter,
I think the detection rate would be much improved. Also some time
spent learning more about SA in general would allow the OP to fine
tune his config so that the current manual effort put into creating
hammer smashing rules is unneeded.
Good luck
-Aaron
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Jose Luis Marin Perez
wrote:
> Dear Sirs.
>
> Thank you for your answers
>
> Qmail-Smtpd have the following RBL configured:
>
> bl.spamcop.net
> cbl.abuseat.org
> combined.njabl.org
Consider zen. It is excellent. Spamcop and NJABL have caused too
many false posi
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 10:21 PM, LuKreme wrote:
> On 22-Sep-2009, at 14:42, Aaron Wolfe wrote:
>
>> Also consider the invalument block lists, see
>> http://dnsbl.invaluement.com/
>> A very, very good list that is usable for blocking. Not free, but
>> very affor
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Jose Luis Marin Perez <
jolumape...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sirs
>
> A few moments ago I noticed that SA was not assigned any score for SPAM
> emails, reviewing the log I see this:
>
> *...@40004aba627c21bee88c [25630] info: spamd: got connection over
> /tm
dropping
after proper adjustment of SA instances.
A lot of the time SA spends with a message is just idling waiting on
network checks to finish. A local caching nameserver can speed this
up. do you use one? probably worth the ram it takes away from SA.
Once you limit the # of instances to work within the available RAM,
see if the delay is reasonable.
good luck
-Aaron
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
