On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:59:53 -0600, Sidarth Dasari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
Spam? The last Spam message I saw was in late October -- or was
it early November? This is what filtering is for:
http://w
On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 11:59:53PM -0600, Sidarth Dasari wrote:
> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
>
None at all where I am, my host's spam filtering must be working! :-)
--
Chris Green
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a
On Sat, Nov 24, 2007 at 11:59:53PM -0600, Sidarth Dasari wrote:
> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
I think it got worse after the transition to the new host
(liszt.debian.org)[1]. Maybe the transition is not complete yet?
[1] http://lists.debian.org/deb
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:59:53 -0600
Sidarth Dasari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/25/07 00:43, Jonathan Kaye wrote:
> Sidarth Dasari wrote:
>
>> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
> Yes, a real spam blizzard has hit debian.user I'm using a newsreader (knode)
> and i
Sidarth Dasari wrote:
> Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
Yes, a real spam blizzard has hit debian.user I'm using a newsreader (knode)
and it's pretty easy to lose authentic messages in the crowd, but I really
feel for the people who get this list
Sidarth Dasari wrote:
Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
Not only spam, but spam of the Japanese and Arabian variety :-/
Sam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is anybody else getting tons of spam emails from this mailing list?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
I'm migrating an old mail server (qmail) to a new server (new hw). I want to
add some anti-spam and anti-virus filter to qmail. I'm thinking about two
solutions:
- Qmail-ldap + qmail-scanner+clamav+spamassassin
- Qmail-ldap + clamsmtp + spampd + iptables
What do you think ab
better of using the
> >>zen.spamhaus.org combined blocklist wich is very effective and has
> >>almost
> >>no false positives. I don't know how they do it, but it catches
> >>90% of my
> >>spam on it's own. More info can be found on
John K Masters([EMAIL PROTECTED]) is reported to have said:
> On 18:12 Sun 09 Sep , Mumia W.. wrote:
> > On 09/09/2007 03:08 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
> >> [EMAIL P
x27;t know how they do it, but it catches
90% of my
spam on it's own. More info can be found on http://www.spamhaus.org
The proiblem of using RBLs on SMTP-time is that the mail is gone,
nevertheless it was UCE or not. This becomes even more problematic, as
postfix currently can't wei
th million senders being forged every day that helps a lot.
Pretty much all the spam I see these days is sent direct-to-MX by
trojaned PCs running dedicated spam-spewing software. Rejecting at
SMTP time doesn't create any backscatter spam in this situation,
because the spamware isn'
On Sep 19, 2007, at 1:56 PM, John K Masters wrote:
Without wishing to start a conspiracy theory but has anyone collected
stats on the mail-agents used to send spam. Up till a couple of months
ago most were Outlook but since then I have seen a dramatic
increase in
the use of The Bat! to send
don't know how they do it, but it catches
90% of my
spam on it's own. More info can be found on http://www.spamhaus.org
The proiblem of using RBLs on SMTP-time is that the mail is gone,
nevertheless it was UCE or not.
That's true, although the sending server will generate a
On 18:12 Sun 09 Sep , Mumia W.. wrote:
> On 09/09/2007 03:08 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> [...]
>> A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Best you use mutt's bounce-function or
>> Kmails redirect functio
Hi,
On Tue Sep 18, 2007 at 08:36:30 +0200, Peter Teunissen wrote:
> For directly blocking mail however, you'd be better of using the
> zen.spamhaus.org combined blocklist wich is very effective and has almost
> no false positives. I don't know how they do it, but it catches
On Sep 18, 2007, at 8:58 PM, s. keeling wrote:
For directly blocking mail however, you'd be better of using the
zen.spamhaus.org combined blocklist wich is very effective and
has almost
Much simpler to just bogofilter. :-)
I like to do both, on my home system. IPs in the spamhaus.org l
Peter Teunissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Tue, September 18, 2007 04:39, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> >
> > Such a system is implemented by spamcop (www.spamcop.net). Their block
> > list,
>
> For directly blocking mail however, you'd be better of using the
> zen.spamhaus.org combined bloc
Am 2007-09-15 03:44:40, schrieb Ron Johnson:
> What does this have to do with Linux or Debian? Did you neglect to
> inform us of some pertinent information?
- END OF REPLIED MESSAGE -
Maybe he is runing "vbox" so, if someone call him, he can trigger
On Tue, September 18, 2007 04:39, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> Adam Hardy wrote:
>
>> A few days back I asked whether anyone had heard of a spam IP blacklist
>> filter maintained by a community of spam 'reporters' who submit spam
>> emails to the s
Adam Hardy wrote:
> A few days back I asked whether anyone had heard of a spam IP blacklist
> filter maintained by a community of spam 'reporters' who submit spam
> emails to the server. Each reporter has their own 'effectiveness rating'
> and once enough 'e
Adam wrote:
> Admittedly it wouldn't catch image spam advertising hot stocks, but it would
> certainly take out the others and seems to me to be a better bet than dynamic
> filters.
I remember that there was a ton of that not too long ago. There was
supposed to be
fiters that wou
Michelle Konzack on 17/09/07 09:33, wrote:
Am 2007-09-13 12:15:10, schrieb Andrew Sackville-West:
now what was your point?
The Listmasters should deactivate the SPAM-Filtering...
Hmmm, the we get all P-Enlargements for 4 km -- Oops!
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day Michelle Konzack
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 03:44:40AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 09/14/07 19:50, Mike McClain wrote:
> > Today I had 7 messages on the answering machine all with
> > the same voice leaving the same message, ' We have a very
>
> If you are in the US, sign up for the No Call list. In my
> experie
Am 2007-09-13 12:15:10, schrieb Andrew Sackville-West:
> now what was your point?
The Listmasters should deactivate the SPAM-Filtering...
Hmmm, the we get all P-Enlargements for 4 km -- Oops!
Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Do
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 05:57:15PM -0400, Hal Vaughan wrote:
>
> Would you believe...
>
> ...It's finally on DVD, but from only one source (I think Time-Life, but
> for some reason, I think it's HBO that owns the rights now). You can't
> buy it retail or through discount sources, though. (Sor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/14/07 19:50, Mike McClain wrote:
> Today I had 7 messages on the answering machine all with
> the same voice leaving the same message, ' We have a very
If you are in the US, sign up for the No Call list. In my
experience, it has been very effe
Today I had 7 messages on the answering machine all with
the same voice leaving the same message, ' We have a very
important message for Mike but all our agents are busy. Please
hold.' I get so many messages from people who don't know
anything about me but that I might have money I might send
them
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:27:36PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2007-09-09 12:25:59, schrieb Andrew Sackville-West:
> > I know this doesn't really help you, but I've seen a *massive*
> > increase in spam hitting my one server in the last couple of
> > days. Pr
Am 2007-09-09 12:25:59, schrieb Andrew Sackville-West:
> I know this doesn't really help you, but I've seen a *massive*
> increase in spam hitting my one server in the last couple of
> days. Previously I was seeing something like 50 spam a day hitting me
> (this is after clam
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 01:14:58AM -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Richard Lyons wrote:
> >I've never heard of it before either, even though I've been here on and
> >off for years. On the other hand, I've never seen a problem posting, or
> >been aware that there was a problem.
>
> Never had a pro
've gone from a DynDNS setup ages ago on dialup, hosting my own server on
DSL, leasing two machines (one in a spam block, no less, never make that
mistake again) and now have taken to leasing a Xen VM for my mail/web needs.
The only time I've ever had a problem with the list was when i
Yes, I joined the white list and emailed full headers
from my email post attempt to
the listmasters.
Never heard back from the listmaster so maybe
my email to him/her got eaten by a spam filter too.
Nothing works except the way I post now
which is using google groups to post.
Just hope the one
t; > >> On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -0000, J wrote:
> > >>> Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
> > >>> posted.
> > >>
> > >> Can you please check if you are subscribed to
> > >> [EMAIL
On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 10:54:05PM -0400, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> Mumia W.. wrote:
>
> > On 09/10/2007 02:46 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -, J wrote:
> >>> Real problem with
Mumia W.. wrote:
> On 09/10/2007 02:46 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -, J wrote:
>>> Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
>>> posted.
>>
>> Can you p
Well, congrats to the good folks at the Debian User mailing list.
From the recent lack of spam, it seems the spam issue is fixed.
Mark
On 09/10/2007 02:46 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
Hi,
On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -, J wrote:
Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
posted.
Can you please check if you are subscribed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The other thing that would help the listma
On 09/10/2007 02:46 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
Hi,
On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -, J wrote:
Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
posted.
Can you please check if you are subscribed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
Huh? This is the first I'v
On Mon, 10 Sep 2007 18:41:15 -
J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By the way, if you want to get rid of spam, read the debian
> user email list with gmail
> and all the spam goes to a junk folder.
Not so. I use Gmail and I have been seeing quite a bit of spam in the
last few
Hi,
On Tue Sep 11, 2007 at 01:05:13 +0600, S. M. Ibrahim (Lavlu) wrote:
> Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
> >-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >Hash: SHA1
> >
> >Chuck Payne wrote:
> >
> >>Guys,
> >>
> >>What is going on? Last three da
Hi,
On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 14:48:27 -0400, Chuck Payne wrote:
> Guys,
>
> What is going on? Last three days, I got a increase of spam and it all
> coming from this list. Are you guys working to fix it?
Please report spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And yes, we are working on
Hi,
On Mon Sep 10, 2007 at 18:41:15 -, J wrote:
> Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
> posted.
Can you please check if you are subscribed to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The other thing that would help the listmasters is, if you could pass
the messag
On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 22:08:17 +0200
Martin Zobel-Helas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Best you use mutt's bounce-function or
> Kmails redirect function for that, so the headers do
Real problem with debian user is not spam, but that posts don' t get
posted.
Every since around late June 2007, posts don't make it to
debian user list. It used to work.
I've tried 5 email accounts and over 15 posts and I've only found
one way to post a question, an answe
Sarunas Burdulis wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck Payne wrote:
Guys,
What is going on? Last three days, I got a increase of spam and it all
coming from this list. Are you guys working to fix it?
Payne
No spam is getting to me via this route (below). How
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chuck Payne wrote:
> Guys,
>
> What is going on? Last three days, I got a increase of spam and it all
> coming from this list. Are you guys working to fix it?
>
> Payne
>
>
No spam is getting to me via this route (be
Guys,
What is going on? Last three days, I got a increase of spam and it all
coming from this list. Are you guys working to fix it?
Payne
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
> A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Best you use mutt's bounce-function or
> Kmails redirect function for that, so the headers don't get modified, so
> we can directly us that emails to train our filters to do be
Hi,
On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 18:12:28 -0500, Mumia W.. wrote:
> On 09/09/2007 03:08 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> >[...]
> >A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Best you use mutt's bounce-function or
> >Kmail
Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 14:33:08 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 05:26:56PM -0400, KS wrote:
>>> No. That was a statement in addition to my earlier post asking if an
>>> email client can also &q
On Sunday 09 September 2007 15:08, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> Hi Nigel,
>
> On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 21:15:32 +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam
> > yet again. I can't send it to Spamcop because it will id
very interested to know what the discussion about blacklisting or
greylisting involved.
I heard a colleague once describe a spam IP blacklist filter maintained by a
community of spam 'reporters' who submitted spam emails to the server. Each
reporter had their own 'effectiveness rati
On 09/09/2007 03:08 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
[...]
A thing every user can do is to bounce spam delivered to the lists to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Best you use mutt's bounce-function or
Kmails redirect function for that, so the headers don't get modified, so
we can directly us that email
On 09/09/2007 04:20 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
Hi,
On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 15:48:33 -0500, Mumia W.. wrote:
On the archives at http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/ , there is a
button titled "Report as Spam." My understanding is that it's connected
to a Bayesian filter and t
:32PM +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > > > > This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded
> > > > > with s-x spam yet again.
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > Sorry if this sounds a bit sarcastic, but I'm
Hi,
On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 14:33:08 -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 05:26:56PM -0400, KS wrote:
> >
> > No. That was a statement in addition to my earlier post asking if an
> > email client can also "report spam" just as we can do via
than a joke now. We are being bombarded with
> > > > s-x spam yet again.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Sorry if this sounds a bit sarcastic, but I'm feeling sarcastic
> > > > at the moment, as I don't want this cr-p on my mac
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 05:26:56PM -0400, KS wrote:
>
> No. That was a statement in addition to my earlier post asking if an
> email client can also "report spam" just as we can do via the web
> interface manually. If it was possible, my client (and possibly several
> o
Raquel wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:35:41 -0400
> KS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> The only way I know to report spam is to click the "Report Spam"
>>> button on the web interface for list archives. Can that be done
>>> via Iceweasel(or o
Hi,
On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 15:48:33 -0500, Mumia W.. wrote:
> On the archives at http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/ , there is a
> button titled "Report as Spam." My understanding is that it's connected
> to a Bayesian filter and that is arranges for the spam messa
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 10:08:17PM +0200, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
...
>
> Actually you can be lucky that you are not subscribed to
> lists.debian.org before the spam-filter. I needed to do that today, to
> find some nasty errors in our new setup, which really sucked. Watching
On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:48:33 -0500
"Mumia W.." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the archives at http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/ , there is
> a button titled "Report as Spam." My understanding is that it's
> connected to a Bayesian filter and that
On Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:35:41 -0400
KS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The only way I know to report spam is to click the "Report Spam"
> > button on the web interface for list archives. Can that be done
> > via Iceweasel(or other mail clients) interfac
On the archives at http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/ , there is a
button titled "Report as Spam." My understanding is that it's connected
to a Bayesian filter and that is arranges for the spam message to be
removed from the archives.
I think this button's functionality
On Sunday 09 September 2007, Nigel Henry wrote:
> On Sunday 09 September 2007 21:25, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > > This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with
> &
On Sunday 09 September 2007 21:25, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam
> > yet again.
>
> ...
>
> > Sorry if this sounds a bit sarcastic
Hi Nigel,
On Sun Sep 09, 2007 at 21:15:32 +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam yet
> again. I can't send it to Spamcop because it will identify the list as the
> sender.
True, and you will most probably also get k
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 12:25:59PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam yet
> > again.
> ...
>
> > Sorry if this sounds a bit
words they
> >> do,
> >> I am blocked from posting???
> >>
> >
> > The only way I know to report spam is to click the "Report Spam" button
> > on the web interface for list archives. Can that be done via
> > Iceweasel(or other mail c
On Sunday 09 September 2007 20:57, Nigel Henry wrote:
> I've just complained twice about s-x spam that's turning up on the list,
> and neither of my posts are to be seen anywhere. Murphy seems to be
> moderating complaints from legitimate users of the list, but allowing
>
KS wrote:
> Nigel Henry wrote:
>> On Sunday 09 September 2007 20:57, Nigel Henry wrote:
>>> I've just complained twice about s-x spam that's turning up on the list,
>>> and neither of my posts are to be seen anywhere. Murphy seems to be
>>> moderatin
On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 09:15:32PM +0200, Nigel Henry wrote:
> This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam yet
> again.
...
> Sorry if this sounds a bit sarcastic, but I'm feeling sarcastic at the
> moment,
> as I don't want this cr-p on
Nigel Henry wrote:
> On Sunday 09 September 2007 20:57, Nigel Henry wrote:
>> I've just complained twice about s-x spam that's turning up on the list,
>> and neither of my posts are to be seen anywhere. Murphy seems to be
>> moderating complaints from legitimate
This has got more than a joke now. We are being bombarded with s-x spam yet
again. I can't send it to Spamcop because it will identify the list as the
sender.
Come on Murphy, get your act together, get the sawn-off out of it's case, and
filter these spammers off the list. One way or
I've just complained twice about s-x spam that's turning up on the list, and
neither of my posts are to be seen anywhere. Murphy seems to be moderating
complaints from legitimate users of the list, but allowing "spa--ers" to do
what they like.
I've had a few drinks,
In a previous thread Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 01:54:52PM -0500, ArcticFox wrote:
>> Uh, what the heck is this crap? I hope I'm not going to start getting
>> spam through this list now....
> >
>> Yup, it's spam. Someone needs to get t
ut I kept
getting unpredictable results.
SIGUSR2 will exit the program. I believe this will work flawlessly.
---
DynaStop: Stopping spam one dynamic IP address at a time.
http://tanaya.net/DynaStop/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/24/07 01:39, Matthias wrote:
> Hello,
>
>> But that means that Debian Developers are the way that "Linux" (the
>> kernel? libc?, something else?) are deeply changing The Way Unix Works.
>>
>> And I just don't believe they'd do that. For one th
developers (kernel et all) are
striving to gain the best utilization of current and new hardware. At
times, this does have an impact of low level functions and their
APIs. Its really the only way to move forward and progress.
---
DynaStop: Stopping spam one dynamic IP address at a time.
http:/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/23/07 23:04, Matthias wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Jul 23, 3:30 pm, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> The issue is not with debian iteself, but rather my implementation of
>>> signal handling. My feeling is that in trying to write code fo
impy
ignored. Perhaps a difference in the implementation of sigaction vs
signal?
Hopefully I can get some more reports from Debian users that the
problem has been corrected with the updates I've done.
---
DynaStop: Stopping spam one dynamic IP address at a time.
http://tanaya.net/DynaStop/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/23/07 14:04, Matthias wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Jul 23, 6:10 am, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> this. The biggest issue seems to be in signal handling. I have been
>>> told that certain version of Debian do not respond to the USR a
ross-section (debian, BSD, GNU), I missed something that debian
specifically needs to be told for proper signal handling.
---
DynaStop: Stopping spam one dynamic IP address at a time.
http://tanaya.net/DynaStop/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/23/07 00:00, Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
[snip]
> this. The biggest issue seems to be in signal handling. I have been
> told that certain version of Debian do not respond to the USR and HUP
> sugnals.
What do you mean by "Debian" doesn't respond
Hello,
On Jul 23, 2:20 am, steef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> quite interesting! but: what does this program add to spamassassin?
spamassassin, like dspam, can use the X-DynaStop tag to train on
spam. Spam Zombies are by far the largest group in the Dynamic IP
address range (
Mar Matthias Darin wrote:
Hello,
Please forgive me if this is an inappropriate area for this request.
I have written an anti-spam tool for linux called DynaStop. It works
with Exim and procmail on the limited number of versions I have
tested, but I am having trouble verifyng its operations on
Hello,
Please forgive me if this is an inappropriate area for this request.
I have written an anti-spam tool for linux called DynaStop. It works
with Exim and procmail on the limited number of versions I have
tested, but I am having trouble verifyng its operations on Debian.
I've
Hi,
On Sun Jun 10, 2007 at 19:08:14 -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> Anyone what what application drops this header into the email?
/me.
It is an information header for the listmasters saying something about
the status of some config files. Those headers can be ignored by end
users, it is just impor
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 19:17:39 -0400
Roberto C. Sánchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 07:08:14PM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> > Anyone what what application drops this header into the email?
> >
>
> I am going to go with spamassassin.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Roberto
>
Well, spa
On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 07:08:14PM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
> Anyone what what application drops this header into the email?
>
I am going to go with spamassassin.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com
signature.asc
Description: D
Anyone what what application drops this header into the email?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, I couldn't find this on the debian packages.
But it looks promising...
On May 26, 2007, at 10:14 PM, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
Returning this to the list.
On Sat, May 26, 2007 at 10:08:24PM -0400, Tom Allison wrote:
How is this different from the mod_auth_pgsql...
Newer?
Faster?
Stable?
ann kok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> for the spam to inside, what is the command to easy to
> identify the huge mail to send to the server
Just as an example, procmail:
:0 B
* >102400
{
LOG="Too big --- "
:0:
/dev/null
}
Which says, "if t
Hi all
I have add memory and spam questions
1/ After adding the memory from 1G to 2G, the bios can
show the correct 2G memory. but the kernel can't show
it. Do I need to change any setting?
I believe this is related to a kernel config option. I am assuming you know
how to configur
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 08:44 -0700, ann kok wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I have add memory and spam questions
>
> 1/ After adding the memory from 1G to 2G, the bios can
> show the correct 2G memory. but the kernel can't show
> it. Do I need to change any setting?
>
> 2/
On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 08:44:51AM -0700, ann kok wrote:
>
> 1/ After adding the memory from 1G to 2G, the bios can
> show the correct 2G memory. but the kernel can't show
> it. Do I need to change any setting?
>
What kernel and architecture are you running?
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sá
Hi all
I have add memory and spam questions
1/ After adding the memory from 1G to 2G, the bios can
show the correct 2G memory. but the kernel can't show
it. Do I need to change any setting?
2/ I have the problem about spam to outside/inside.
How can I prevent users to spam mail to outsid
Am 2007-03-13 19:02:48, schrieb Paul Johnson:
> Why do it this way when using spamassassin at SMTP time lets you reject the
> spam regardless of content at SMTP time instead of using heuristics that
> *will* come back to haunt you later?
Since I use courier-mta for regular mail and fet
801 - 900 of 2783 matches
Mail list logo
