At 02:24 PM 6/23/2008, Josh Carroll wrote:
Not sure if the core duos work the same as older 2 CPU and 4 CPU
motherboards, but there are some BIOS functions that always use the first
CPU. So you never get true SMP because the hardware uses the first CPU
more
to service interrupts.
True,
At 08:54 PM 5/11/2008, Novembre wrote:
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 5:42 PM, Derek Ragona
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 02:17 PM 5/11/2008, Novembre wrote:
Hi all,
I have upgraded my home desktop (1.4GHz P-IIIS) machine from 6.2-RELEASE-p9
to 7.0-RELEASE some time ago. When
Hi -
My email server is on FreeBSD 5.4 Release. I got a lot spam mails every day
and it is really a headache to clean these mails in my pop mail client
software daily.
Is there any effective way to reduce and block these spam emails? Please
help to provide me hint or direction.
Thank you
On Sunday 02 March 2008 09:30:47 pm Ming Tang wrote:
Hi -
My email server is on FreeBSD 5.4 Release. I got a lot spam mails every day
and it is really a headache to clean these mails in my pop mail client
software daily.
Is there any effective way to reduce and block these spam emails
use, however I just
provided two off the top of my head.
~Paul
Ming Tang wrote:
Hi -
My email server is on FreeBSD 5.4 Release. I got a lot spam mails every day
and it is really a headache to clean these mails in my pop mail client
software daily.
Is there any effective way to reduce
Vikas P. Sonawani wrote:
Where I will get video/x-ms-asf-plugin for firefox?
Try ports/www/mplayer-plugin
--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Where I will get video/x-ms-asf-plugin for firefox?
Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
I was wondering if anyone knew of a good howto, or some tips for
filtering spam using dspam in a setup where virtual users (various
domains) are stored in LDAP. Currently we hand off email to dspam in the
filter stage and dspam hands it back into postfix as lmtp, the problem
J. Johnston wrote:
Hello,
I was wondering if anyone knew of a good howto, or some tips for
filtering spam using dspam in a setup where virtual users (various
domains) are stored in LDAP. Currently we hand off email to dspam in
the filter stage and dspam hands it back into postfix as lmtp
my
last set up got totally bogged down handling my, and my client's
email, frequently running with a load of 8 or more with several spam
per second. A real drag.
This set up runs at a much lower load, and seems to do a better job
filtering spam.
Since you're already using PF, why not use
got totally bogged down handling my, and my client's
email, frequently running with a load of 8 or more with several spam
per second. A real drag.
This set up runs at a much lower load, and seems to do a better job
filtering spam.
-- John
I've been doing some more digging since my last post, and have
figured out that the spam is not being blocked by pf, as I suspected
(since it wasn't showing up in my spam folder), but by spamassassin
blacklists.
The smtp log file has lots of entries like:
2008-01-14 09:30:37.074087500
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 08:48:32 -0500
John Almberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The smtp log file has lots of entries like:
2008-01-14 09:30:37.074087500 rblsmtpd: 123.20.89.67 pid 72121: 451
http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=123.20.89.67
2008-01-14 09:31:05.271514500 rblsmtpd: 58.227.241.97
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:48:32AM -0500, John Almberg wrote:
I've been doing some more digging since my last post, and have figured out
that the spam is not being blocked by pf, as I suspected (since it wasn't
showing up in my spam folder), but by spamassassin blacklists.
The smtp log
cpghost [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:48:32AM -0500, John Almberg wrote:
I've been doing some more digging since my last post, and have figured out
that the spam is not being blocked by pf, as I suspected (since it wasn't
showing up in my spam folder
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008, cpghost wrote:
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 08:48:32AM -0500, John Almberg wrote:
So raises the same point that Oliver makes: how trustworthy are these
blacklists?
YMMV, of course!
I'm using spamhaus.org's blacklists for quite some time (many years)
to block spam in postfix
Hi,
2008-01-14 09:30:37.074087500 rblsmtpd: 123.20.89.67 pid 72121: 451
http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=123.20.89.67
Just one comment, in my installation of SpamAssassin, it reports in
syslog as spamd, not at rblsmtpd. This looks like logs from the
rblsmtpd program that is not
Last week I set up a brand new mail server with a combination of pf/
spamassassin/maildrop for spam filtering... Everything seems to work
great. All real mail seems to be getting through. I monitored the
spamd and maildrop logs during the first few days to make sure my
very conservative
John Almberg wrote:
Last week I set up a brand new mail server with a combination of
pf/spamassassin/maildrop for spam filtering... Everything seems to
work great. All real mail seems to be getting through. I monitored the
spamd and maildrop logs during the first few days to make sure my very
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, John Almberg wrote:
[...]
At the beginning of the week, I was getting a few spam a day in my
spam folder. What has me spooked is that this whole weekend I got
exactly one spam in my spam folder (a false positive, in fact). This
is down from around 500 that I normally get
I know this is an odd thing to worry about, but is this normal? Since
the spam doesn't even seem to be reaching spamd, I'm guessing that
the real hero is pf, which must be blocking 99.99% of spam at the
packet level.
I don't know how you configured pf, but since I use the black list
, but that is long gone. Spammers aren't stupid, and
they
follow the development of anti-spam techniques as much as e-mail
admins
do.
Greylisting is a start, but from my experience it is not nearly
enough.
I have heard this said elsewhere too.
Yes don't rely solely on greylisting unless you're a lucky
On Dec 17, 2007, at 7:56 AM, Eric Crist wrote:
I hear a lot of people saying that greylisting doesn't work, when I
have actual numbers for my network proving it does. These numbers
are from the first week of May 2007 to today:
Greylisted/Rejected Messages: 187560
Spam Tagged Messages
of anti-spam techniques as much as e-mail admins
do.
Greylisting is a start, but from my experience it is not nearly enough.
I have heard this said elsewhere too.
Yes don't rely solely on greylisting unless you're a lucky guy and don't get a
lot of spam.
Also I believe that rejecting e
. Spammers aren't stupid, and
they
follow the development of anti-spam techniques as much as e-mail
admins
do.
Greylisting is a start, but from my experience it is not nearly
enough.
I have heard this said elsewhere too.
Yes don't rely solely on greylisting unless you're a lucky guy
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007 03:12:53 schrieb Chuck Swiger:
Install the following:
/usr/ports/mail/postfix-policyd-weight
/usr/ports/mail/postgrey
Just as an added suggestion: these two (very!) lightweight packages suffice to
keep SPAM out of our
On 14:48:35 Dec 15, Jorn Argelo wrote:
Greylisting only works so-so nowadays. There was a couple of months it was
very effective, but that is long gone. Spammers aren't stupid, and they
follow the development of anti-spam techniques as much as e-mail admins do.
Greylisting is a start
Am Samstag, 15. Dezember 2007 14:48:35 schrieb Jorn Argelo:
snip
Also I believe that rejecting e-mail is a big point of discussion. We
had an internet e-mail environment built about 3 years ago, and there
the users were terrorized by spam. We had some users getting 30 spam
mails a day
copied to a folder (/var/spool/spam) so I can review it.
Occasionally I have to recover an email from that folder because it was
falsely labeled as spam. Usually it's someone using incredimail or a
similar service that loads up an email with all sorts of extra junk.
Policyd-weight is the perfect
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Sten and the rest,
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that would
reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router). The problem
is that i have little knowledge on what this actually means. Googling
reveals
I have found spam assassin with nightly updates of the helpful (there
are other people developing new regexs daily).
48 5 * * * /usr/local/bin/sa-update --channel updates.spamassassin.org
/usr/local/etc/rc.d/sa-spamd restart
There are other channels you can subscribe
Hi Sten,
I ran /usr/ports/security/amavisd-new for a year or so. I must admit, I
didn't update it so more and more spam made it's way through. A mate tipped
me off on trying:
/usr/ports/mail/mailscanner
Much easier to install than amavisd-new. I found it easier to understand
the config
Rudy wrote:
Steve Bertrand wrote:
* Once it is setup then it would require no additional maintenance.
* Potential spam messages are marked with a special header that can be
filtered on user discretion on their local mail client software.
Yes, one recommendation for sure. Give up on your
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that would
reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router). The
problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually means.
Googling reveals a whole universe of interesting ways but what should
i pursue
On Wednesday 12 December 2007, Sten Daniel Soersdal said:
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that
would reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router).
The problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually
means. Googling reveals a whole
Sten Daniel Soersdal wrote:
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that would
reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router). The
problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually means.
Googling reveals a whole universe of interesting ways
* Once it is setup then it would require no additional maintenance.
* Potential spam messages are marked with a special header that can
be filtered on user discretion on their local mail client software.
Neither performance, scalability, license nor cost is of much
importance to me
On Wednesday 12 December 2007, Sten Daniel Soersdal said:
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that
would reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router).
The problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually
means. Googling reveals a whole
On Dec 12, 2007, at 5:12 PM, Sten Daniel Soersdal wrote:
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that
would reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router).
The problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually
means. Googling reveals a whole
they want to set their spam score,
whitelist, blacklist, whether they want bayes filtering, whether they
want bayes autolearn and so forth.
It has been pretty low maintenance. I am in the process of evaluating
the possibility of using amavis-new
On Thursday 13 December 2007 03:35:00 Duane Hill wrote:
It has been pretty low maintenance. I am in the process of evaluating
the possibility of using amavis-new.
I used amavis-new on a Linux system and lost the ability to have per-user
settings. I had to go with a systemwide setting and I
have control over what they want to set their spam score,
whitelist, blacklist, whether they want bayes filtering, whether they
want bayes autolearn and so forth.
It has been pretty low maintenance. I am in the process of evaluating
the possibility of using amavis-new.
For myself, I've run
On 12/12/07, Sten Daniel Soersdal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have a need for a relatively painless anti-spam solution that would
reduce the amount of incoming spam (via postfix mail router). The
problem is that i have little knowledge on what this actually means.
Googling reveals a whole
* Once it is setup then it would require no additional maintenance.
* Potential spam messages are marked with a special header that can be
filtered on user discretion on their local mail client software.
Yes, one recommendation for sure. Give up on your first goal. It'll
never happen
Steve Bertrand wrote:
* Once it is setup then it would require no additional maintenance.
* Potential spam messages are marked with a special header that can be
filtered on user discretion on their local mail client software.
Yes, one recommendation for sure. Give up on your first goal. It'll
Am Donnerstag, 13. Dezember 2007 03:12:53 schrieb Chuck Swiger:
Install the following:
/usr/ports/mail/postfix-policyd-weight
/usr/ports/mail/postgrey
Just as an added suggestion: these two (very!) lightweight packages suffice to
keep SPAM out of our company pretty much completely. Both
M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I have Claws-Mail and spamd installed (from ports) and although I
have been using this combination -I've been been manually marking
all spams as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_ spam
message is detected.
I've followed the instructions
have been using this combination -I've been been manually marking
all spams as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_ spam
message is detected.
I've followed the instructions on Claws/spamd wiki. I've got the
followings in /etc/rc.conf:
spamd_enable=YES
spamd_flags=-C
have Claws-Mail and spamd installed (from ports) and although
I have been using this combination -I've been been manually
marking all spams as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_
spam message is detected.
I've followed the instructions on Claws/spamd wiki. I've got
Hi,
I have Claws-Mail and spamd installed (from ports) and although I
have been using this combination -I've been been manually marking
all spams as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_ spam
message is detected.
I've followed the instructions on Claws/spamd wiki. I've got
Hi all,
I have Claws-Mail and spamd installed (from ports) and although I have
been using this combination -I've been been manually marking all spams
as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_ spam message is detected.
I've followed the instructions on Claws/spamd wiki. I've got
Claws-Mail and spamd installed (from ports) and although I have
been using this combination -I've been been manually marking all spams
as 'spam'- for more than 2 months, still _no_ spam message is detected.
I've followed the instructions on Claws/spamd wiki. I've got the
followings in /etc
(Thunderbird PDAs) for
J primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
J scanning would be a plus too.
R I've been using bogofilter for some years now, and it works very well once
R you've trained it properly.
I started collecting spam a few years ago, and I use a Bayesian
spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
J scanning would be a plus too.
R I've been using bogofilter for some years now, and it works very well once
R you've trained it properly.
I started collecting spam a few years ago, and I use a Bayesian filter
called ifile
On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 15:20 -0500, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too
My setup is basically everything gets pumped though procmail and ends up
in an Courier imap directories.
I'm thinking of going with something like SpamBouncer (procmail filter).
Anyone use that before? Any other spam filtering that might work better
with this setup
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 04:54:22PM -0500, Jack Barnett wrote:
My setup is basically everything gets pumped though procmail and ends up in
an Courier imap directories.
I'm thinking of going with something like SpamBouncer (procmail filter).
Anyone use that before? Any other spam
My setup is basically everything gets pumped though procmail and ends up
in an Courier imap directories.
I am using SpamAssassin (from the ports) inside procmail that
quarantine every suspect messages and send a daily summary:
http://www.cs.ait.ac.th/laboratory/email/quarantine.shtml
Best
like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too.
...jgm
I use mailscanner with sendmail which uses spamassasin with clamav. All
from the ports.
I used
(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too.
...jgm
I use mailscanner with sendmail which uses spamassasin with
clamav. All
from the ports.
I used Mailscanner at one time
On October 01, 2007 at 06:39AM Martin Hepworth wrote:
Top posting is gmail being broken - just like Outleek ;-(
Actually, Outlook can be configured to place replies at the bottom of
a replied to message.
I am amazed though that you have not been able to figure out how to
navigate to the
On 9/30/07, Joe in MPLS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too
Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Top posting is gmail being broken - just like Outleek ;-(
as for the whole mailscanner/postfix thing I'm very aware of the issues and
the fact no-one who actually works WW with likes him ;-)
The Better Gmail plugin for Firefox includes an option to
On 10/1/07, Ryan Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Top posting is gmail being broken - just like Outleek ;-(
as for the whole mailscanner/postfix thing I'm very aware of the issues
and
the fact no-one who actually works WW with likes him ;-)
The
anti-spam tool I've used with Postfix is policyd-weight.
mail/postfix-policyd-weight
--
Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Senior Information Security Analyst
The University of Texas at Dallas
http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
___
freebsd-questions
By far the best anti-spam tool I've used with Postfix is policyd-weight.
mail/postfix-policyd-weight
Agreed. +1. Me too.
:)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe
On Oct 1, 2007, at 6:54 PM, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
By far the best anti-spam tool I've used with Postfix is policyd-
weight.
mail/postfix-policyd-weight
Agreed. +1. Me too.
Seconded (or thirded :).
policyd-weight is much smaller than amavisd-new or SpamAssassin (it
tends to run a couple
On Monday 01 October 2007 22:18:00 Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 6:54 PM, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
By far the best anti-spam tool I've used with Postfix is policyd-
weight.
mail/postfix-policyd-weight
Agreed. +1. Me too.
Seconded (or thirded :).
policyd-weight is much
On Monday 01 October 2007 22:48:09 Pollywog wrote:
On Monday 01 October 2007 22:18:00 Chuck Swiger wrote:
On Oct 1, 2007, at 6:54 PM, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
By far the best anti-spam tool I've used with Postfix is policyd-
weight.
mail/postfix-policyd-weight
Agreed. +1. Me too
I am using postfix+amavis (doing spamassassin)+postgrey and I rarely get any
spam come through.
I run a fairly light weight email server only doing a coulple of thousand
emails a day.
Mailgraph is a great port to integrate as well as it graphs how many emails
have been blocked due to spam/virus
On October 01, 2007 at 01:31PM Ryan Phillips wrote:
Martin Hepworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Top posting is gmail being broken - just like Outleek ;-(
as for the whole mailscanner/postfix thing I'm very aware of the issues and
the fact no-one who actually works WW with likes him ;-)
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too.
...jgm
At 03:20 PM 9/30/2007, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too
On Sunday 30 September 2007 20:28:23 Derek Ragona wrote:
At 03:20 PM 9/30/2007, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 03:20:58PM -0500, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would
On Sunday 30 September 2007 21:03:06 Roland Smith wrote:
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 03:20:58PM -0500, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially
wrote:
At 03:20 PM 9/30/2007, Joe in MPLS wrote:
I'm running 6.2-STABLE with postfix with cyrus-sasl, imap-uw horde
for
mail. I'd like to stop depending on clients(Thunderbird PDAs) for
primary spam control (especially because our PDAs don't do any). AV
scanning would be a plus too
+ SpamAssassin, and then gets delivered to the recipients on
my machine (unless filtered out by the above programs).
This works fine, however, I'm getting more and more spam, and it
seems Spam Assassin is not filtering out a lot using its default
settings.
The question(s):
I'd like to tune Spam
On Aug 15, 2007, at 1:19 PM, Olaf Greve wrote:
The question(s):
I'd like to tune Spam Assassin such that it filters out much more
spam, whilst letting (almost) all proper messages through.
Thunderbird's spam controls are pretty good at filtering out spam,
and I was hoping perhaps Spam
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to
hear people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side
anti-spam. The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's
hard to know port which to try.
And call it a quirk of mine, but I really dislike
Richard Coleman wrote:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to
hear people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side
anti-spam. The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's
hard to know port which to try.
And call it a quirk of mine
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:00:59PM -0400, Richard Coleman wrote:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to hear
people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side anti-spam.
The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's hard to know
Richard Coleman escribió:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to
hear people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side
anti-spam. The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's
hard to know port which to try.
And call it a quirk
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 07:15:09PM +0200, Roland Smith wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 12:00:59PM -0400, Richard Coleman wrote:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to
hear
people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side
anti-spam
Richard Coleman wrote:
hear people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side
anti-spam. The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's
I outsourced ours to AppRiver http://www.appriver.com/ It's not in the unix roll
your own spirit, but:
* it works very well
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to hear
people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side anti-spam.
The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's hard to know port
which to try.
And call it a quirk of mine, but I really dislike
O/H Philip Hallstrom έγραψε:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like
to hear people's recommendation for which port to use to add server
side anti-spam. The problem these days is a richness of choices, so
it's hard to know port which to try.
How you looked into assp
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:21:58PM -0500, David Kelly wrote:
Bogofilter works very well, after you've trained it with some spam
ham. You can get a head start by starting from someone else's wordlist.
BTW, I'd be happy to share my wordlist. At ≈12MB it's kinda large though.
Yes, works very
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Richard Coleman wrote:
I am running a mail server using Postfix and Dovecot. I would like to hear
people's recommendation for which port to use to add server side anti-spam.
The problem these days is a richness of choices, so it's hard to know port
which to try
And call it a quirk of mine, but I really dislike (server) software with
a large number of dependencies. That rules out Spam Assassin. But I am
I am not sure what you call dependencies.
SA is written in Perl, using some Perl libraries, so of course you
need these, but on the other hand
Hi everybody,
hope every1 doing fine well i m using QMAIL for email services. I have also
installed SPAM ASSASINS while installing Qmail. Now i m getting too much
SPAM in every mailbox of my domain.
Kindly help me out and tell me what shld i do. which spam filter is should
use and how
On Wednesday May 30, 2007 at 07:34:35 (AM) DeadMan Xia wrote:
hope every1 doing fine well i m using QMAIL for email services. I have also
installed SPAM ASSASINS while installing Qmail. Now i m getting too much
SPAM in every mailbox of my domain.
Kindly help me out and tell me what
dhaneshk k [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have a freebsd-6.0 server with postfix and mailman running on
this machine , but I havn't configured spamassasin ,amavisd etc in
this box. so I am suffering from spams daily ..
Spamassassin is available as a port, as are a number of other useful
bits
dhaneshk k wrote:
Hi Everbody
I have a freebsd-6.0 server with postfix and mailman running on this
machine ,
but I havn't configured spamassasin ,amavisd etc in this box. so I am
suffering from spams daily ..
You can give it to postfix - just setup some dnsbl zones for it. Good
place
(the steps how to install configure spamassasin,amavisd in this box )
( Genaral question : Is there any port for spamassasin,amavisd in FreeBSD)
I use Postfix without spamsassasin or amavisd and I am not suffering
badly from spam. I followed this guide:
http://www.posluns.com/guides
-Spam-Control--in-FreeBSD-tf3801986.html#a10771360
Sent from the freebsd-questions mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail
Hi Everbody
I have a freebsd-6.0 server with postfix and mailman running on this
machine ,
but I havn't configured spamassasin ,amavisd etc in this box. so I am
suffering from spams daily ..
Since I am a new be to FreeBSD , let me requset you to share your expertise
(the steps how to
for every
users, it is a matter of security policy and no user is allowed to
change that, so it is checked at transport; spam filtering on the
other hand is really a matter of personnal choices, some may have
their own rules, etc. so a message could be treated differently for
each specific user, so
not the same thing as having a very low value. Most
spam is delivered overnight and on the weekend. I think that there are
two reasons for this. The older reason is to keep the bots off of the
RBLs. But I think that the bigger reason to deliver spam off hours is to
protect the botnet from detection. I
-Original Message-
From: Bart Silverstrim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2007 12:08 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: John Levine; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Greylisting -- Was: Anti Spam
You're making it sound as if greylisting is a terrible idea
201 - 300 of 885 matches
Mail list logo
