RE: [sa] Spam Filter Law Suit

[Damian Mendoza]

Thanks for everyone's feedback. Once I receive the actual paperwork and talk to 
their legal firm I'll let everyone know the results.


Regards,

Damian

-Original Message-
From: Charles Gregory [mailto:cgreg...@hwcn.org] 
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 6:26 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: [sa] Spam Filter Law Suit

On Wed, 15 Jul 2009, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Or tell them to go pound sand.  The last Bilski ruling seems to have pretty
> well torpedoed software patents, but some jerks may not have gotten the memo.

Well, I'm not saying this about anyone in particular, as I don't want to
get sued for defaming any particular person's character (LOL), but in
general it is a fair statement that it is often less costly for a big
company to settle out of court rather than go through the expensive
process of defending themselves against a lawsuit. So even though the
company might be 100% guaranteed to 'win' its defense, and have a patent
declared invalid, there is still a decent chance that someone holding a
"questionable" patent could make a profit from it out of court

- C

Spam Filter Law Suit

[Damian Mendoza]

Anyone else being sued by Southwest Technology Innovations regarding spam 
filtering? It's odd that they would name my old company (Workgroup Solutions) 
since they have very few installations (2 person reseller) compared to the 
others named. Any opinions or feedback?

http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20090100138

Southwest Technology Innovations LLC v. St. Bernard Software, Inc. et al
EasyEdit
(What's 
this?)
 What is the EasyEdit button? This website gets better when people like you add 
to it. Just click the EasyEdit button to start. 
(help)
Last update: No updates (content 
history
 | content 
tools)
 
(help)
Keyword tags: None
Plaintiff:

Southwest Technology Innovations LLC

Defendant:

St. Bernard Software, Inc., Espion International, Inc., Workgroup Solutions, 
Inc., Sonicwall, Inc., Mirapoint Software, Inc. and Proofpoint, Inc.



Case Number:

3:2009cv01487

Filed:

July 9, 2009



Court:

California Southern District Court

Office:

San Diego Office [ Court 
Info
 ]

County:

San Diego

Presiding Judge:

Judge John A. Houston

Referring Judge:

Magistrate Judge Jan M. Adler



Nature of Suit:

Intellectual Property - Patent

Cause:

35:271 Patent Infringement

Jurisdiction:

Federal Question

Jury Demanded By:

Plaintiff

PDFInfo Error

[Damian Mendoza]

Hi,

 

Anyone have any idea of the following error message when using SA 3.1.7
and PDFInfo?

 

[EMAIL PROTECTED] spamassassin]# spamassassin --lint

 

[10850] warn: plugin: failed to create instance of plugin
Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::PDFinfo: Can't locate object method "new"
via package "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::PDFinfo" at (eval 70) line 1.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Damian Mendoza

Workgroup Solutions

15 Sembrado

Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688

949 713-7250

Developers of the eMail Archive Appliance and Software -
http://www.emailarchive.us <http://www.emailarchive.us/> 

 

RE: Brightmail

[Damian Mendoza]

We sell BrightMail to customers that want a "Commercial" 
antispam solution and have deep pockets to pay a yearly subscription. We build 
SA based solutions (http://www.spamgate.us) 
for customers that want a "low-cost" antispam solution.
 
 
 
Regards,
 
Damian


From: Gray, Richard 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 8:59 
AMTo: users@spamassassin.apache.orgSubject: 
Brightmail

Brightmail seems to be getting a lot of good press on the SPAM front. 

 
So 
I'm wondering, why do people running large mail systems choose SA over corporate 
offerings. Is it cost? Is it configurability, or performance? 

 
Can 
anyone shed any light on how Brightmail achieves the rather impressive 
statistics it is quoting, or do you think it is just smoke and mirrors? 

 
Is 
it possible to reproduce the other features without spending the 
cash?---This email 
from dns has been validated by dnsMSS Managed Email Security and is free from 
all known viruses.For further information contact 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: slightly OT: sudden rise in Rumplestiltskin attacks?

[Damian Mendoza]

Dave,

Use the following sendmail options with /etc/mail/mailhost containing
your valid user email accounts. I create mailhost from an export of an
LDAP database, if available.


LDAPROUTE_DOMAIN_FILE(`/etc/mail/ldap_domains')dnl
FEATURE(`ldap_routing', `hash /etc/mail/mailhost', `null', `bounce')dnl


Regards,

Damian Mendoza
http://www.spamgate.us


-Original Message-
From: Dave Duffner - NWCWEB.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 8:57 AM
To: 'Eric W. Bates'; 'Pierre Thomson'
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: RE: slightly OT: sudden rise in Rumplestiltskin attacks?


We've had these, especially from some of the sources listed
below, for quite some time.  But we've also seen that same spike lately
and a couple of worthless attempts to hack into our servers and gain
more ID's.

When that doesn't work, it's dictionary time and they spew tons
at us.  If that fails, their next tactic is to do dictionary hits to
other destinations, but use our domains and IP's to forge us as the
source.

We've firewalled and sendmail rejected most of the domains
listed and all the APNIC, RIPE and other IP ranges from overseas.  If we
get complaints, then we investigate the source to determine it's genuine
and open that smaller range back up.  Sad, but it's reduced the workload
by 75%.

Is there a way, possibly with SpamAssassin, to simply reject
anything not going to a valid user account?
I know you can /dev/null everything but then you miss what's being
spewed at you and the problem is never really solved.  They get their
payloads to valid accounts and the spam just continues.

What I'm asking for is some routing in SA or some other program
that could use some format to kill dictionary- style attacks but let the
normal name-based stuff pass to be dealt with.  Bob (even if there isn't
one) would pass, but [EMAIL PROTECTED] would instantly be
tossed.

Any options like that?

  David J. Duffner
  VP Operations
  NWC Corporation
  NWCWEB.com
  

NWCWEB.com - Your Design & Hosting Solution!
Featuring Ensim Pro/Linux Servers, Hosted Accounts, Web Design and
e-Commerce services NWC Corporation - Global e-Pay Solutions

 

> -Original Message-
> From: Eric W. Bates [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 11:39 AM
> To: Pierre Thomson
> Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: slightly OT: sudden rise in Rumplestiltskin attacks?
> 
> 
> We got slammed with a whole series of dictionary attacks in June (as 
> many as 500k per day against a variety of domains).  And, yes, it 
> brought SA to it's knees.  Prior to the flood, we had always 
> configured our customer's domains such that 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] was delivered to the customer's 
> default address.  This worked very well for the past 9 years; but we 
> had to stop.
> 
> Pierre Thomson wrote:
> > One of our relays got 8500 name-guessing spams yesterday,
> up from an
> > average of 2500 per day last week.  So far today we have seen 6600, 
> > and the day isn't half over.  If our MTA weren't checking
> recipients
> > against our userlist, SA would be struggling to process
> these sudden
> > "blasts" of spam.
> > 
> > The sending relays seem to be predominantly in Europe, and
> often make
> > about a dozen tries in rapid succession.  Here are the relays that 
> > sent name-guessing spams in a 2-minute period in the last hour:
> > 
> > dsl-082-082-054-141.arcor-ip.net [82.82.54.141] 
> > dsl-082-082-054-141.arcor-ip.net [82.82.54.141] 
> > dsl-082-082-054-141.arcor-ip.net [82.82.54.141] 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] [62.64.219.183] 
> > omr-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.1] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96]

> > m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr 
> > [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] 
> > m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr 
> > [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] 
> > m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr 
> > [81.65.0.96] m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] 
> > m96.net81-65-0.noos.fr [81.65.0.96] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > mailout08.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.20] omr-m03.mx.aol.com 
> > [64.12.138.3] rega.bezeqint.net [192.115.104.10] 
> > seaattsmtp.avanade.com [12.129.10.40] mailout04.sul.t-online.com 
> > [194.25.134.18] mail.f-tech.net [65.161.2.16] [219.128.36.245] 
> > [219.128.36.245] [210.206.241.100] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [82.103.206.234] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [82.103.206.234] 
> > [