Matt Kettler wrote:
ram wrote:
Are the spammers testing some new spamtool
I am getting mails with just a single word like "gushes" "using" etc
what is this about now ?
Read the archives for more details, however the general consensus is
it's due to:
1) a mass run of short-email
Justin Mason wrote:
Graham Murray writes:
Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Doesn't SA have at least 3 of those already? Razor, DCC, and Pyzor.
Not quite. Those show how many times *others* have seen it, not how
many times *I* have seen it. Also, these have hysteresis
Justin Mason wrote:
Theo Van Dinter writes:
I'm assuming that there will be a Google Summer of Code 2007 going on, and
that the ASF will be involved again. So it's a good time to start thinking
about things we'd like to put up as possible projects.
We still have a number of items from last
John Rudd wrote:
New things:
1) BOTNET_SOHO -- If the sender's (chosen from Envelope-From,
Return-Path, or From, in that order) mail domain (the part after the @
sign) resolves back to the relay's IP address, or has an MX host which
resolves back to the IP address, AND the sender's mail dom
Sammy Anderson wrote:
We recently migrated our SpamAssassin installation from a physical 3.6
GHz system running RHEL 4 and SA 3.0.4 to a VMware VM (ESX 2.5.4) with
RHEL 4 as the guest OS and SA 3.1.7. Each user has their own Bayes
files (Berkeley DB) and these were copied from the old to the n
David B Funk wrote:
Tonight our site is being bombarded by German political spam or
Joe-jobbed bounce fall-out. So far it appears to all be coming
from trojaned PCs. Other than the specific URLs in the messages
havn't found any easily identified parts to create rules for.
anybody else seeing this?
Chr. von Stuckrad wrote:
On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 10:59:12AM -0500, Steven Stern wrote:
I received about 500 on the webmaster account.
Now we know what "sober" was all about.
I see *no* connection to any Virus or Trojan!
I got about 200 of them into a few accounts and
seemingly I'm receiving more e
Lisheng Sun wrote:
Could anyone here tell me how many different factors that will involve with SA?
Say, IP is belong to blacklist, URL is belong to blacklist, etc. What else?
Not include user-defined one.
Thanks.
You should probably visit http://spamassassin.apache.org/tests_3_0_x.html
Gray, Richard wrote:
Anyone care to comment on how successful/effective this particular
product is? (http://www.barracudanetworks.com)
There is something of a major dispute going regarding whether this
represents better value for mney than other solutions (including our
own, self built service
I thought I saw here a while back a script which would check to see if
user wanted spam scanning or not. I've tried going through the list but
alas I just can't seem to find it. Any help would be appreciated.
Tim
William Stearns wrote:
Good evening, all,
I have a favor to ask. Kennedy Western has written in asking to be
removed from the sa-blacklist - the audacity! :-)
Could I trouble any of you that keep your back spam to grab any
Kennedy Wester spams and send them along to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(
What I've do now is:
1) Spam over a certain score goes to /dev/null
2) Spam under a certain score, and over a certain score go to spamtrap
incase someone's looking for something.
3) Low scoring spam gets delivered the user with **SPAM** in the
subject which the users have a client side rules to
1. Generate a bounce message to the envelope sender of the message, and
2. During the SMTP session, refuse to accept mail from the client,
by returning a 500-series SMTP error code.
Option 1 is almost always a terrible idea, unless perhaps the sender
has published an SPF record and the result o
Rob Blomquist wrote:
I run Kmail with SA 3.0.1, and I filter by piping incoming mail to spamc.
I am currently using SARE_OEM SARE_GENLSUBJ SARE_GENLSUBJ_ENG SARE_HTML1
SARE_HTML2 SARE_HEADER1 SARE_HEADER2 SARE_HTML_ENG SARE_BML SARE_FRAUD
SARE_SPOOF SARE_UNSUB SARE_RANDOM SARE_TOP_200 and BOGUSVI
email builder wrote:
I hurried out and installed 3.0.1, thinking one of those memory/language
improvements mentioned in the release notes were going to be my savior...
Sadly, 3.0.1's spamd has the same CPU-intensive behavior here. I am s at
a loss; tried everything I've read... spent days read
Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 05:24:02PM -0400, Tim B wrote:
what are the best options to use when building SpamAssassin on an SMP
system? and during which step do I use those switches?
You don't really get any benefit out of the "-j" switch in our "make&qu
what are the best options to use when building SpamAssassin on an SMP
system? and during which step do I use those switches?
abusquets wrote:
I try to install Spamassassin v 3.0 with perl 5.8.5 and i have this error
/usr/bin/perl: error while loading shared libraries:
/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.5/i686-linux/auto/DBI/DBI.so: undefined symbol:
perl_get_sv
I had funky problem which referenced /DBI/DBI.so which I fixed re
18 matches
Mail list logo
