I treid grey listng and don't use it because too many servers were not
re-sending the e-mail back asap. Alot did and there was no problem.
But some took up to a day to retry the message.
I remeber reading about DPSAM. Also going to look at amavisd-new and assp.
I like the idea of calling it a
Steve:
> Original-Nachricht
> > Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:44:23 -0400
> > Von: Charles Marcus
> > An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> > Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
Steve, I request that you end this thread.
Wietse
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:44:23 -0400
> Von: Charles Marcus
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On 2010-07-16 2:04 PM, Steve wrote:
> > Using something like greylisting is no option either
On 2010-07-16 2:04 PM, Steve wrote:
> Using something like greylisting is no option either because that
> damn steel price can change a bunch of cents in minutes and then
> multiply that with a gazillion of kilos a ship can transport and
> there you are: a lot of money can be lost by holding back a
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 08:06:11PM +0200, Steve wrote:
>
> Original-Nachricht
> > Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:09:54 -0500
> > Von: Kenneth Marshall
> > An: Mikael Bak
> > CC: postfix-users@postfix.org
> > Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:09:54 -0500
> Von: Kenneth Marshall
> An: Mikael Bak
> CC: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 02:55:17PM +0200, Mikael Bak wrote:
> > St
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:55:17 +0200
> Von: Mikael Bak
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> Steve wrote:
> [big snip]
> >> So you have made your point. You prefer (or are required) to
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 02:55:17PM +0200, Mikael Bak wrote:
> Steve wrote:
> [big snip]
> >> So you have made your point. You prefer (or are required) to have user in
> >> control.
> >>
> > Yes. The big problem is that no solution out there is 100% accurate for all
> > users. So the only way to ma
Steve wrote:
[big snip]
>> So you have made your point. You prefer (or are required) to have user in
>> control.
>>
> Yes. The big problem is that no solution out there is 100% accurate for all
> users. So the only way to make the user happy is to delegate the control to
> him.
>
Can't speek fo
Am 16.07.2010 13:10, schrieb Steve:
>
> Original-Nachricht
>> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:03:27 +0200
>> Von: Robert Schetterer
>> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
>> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
>
>> Am 16.07.2010 10:15, sch
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:03:27 +0200
> Von: Robert Schetterer
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> Am 16.07.2010 10:15, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> > Zitat von Robert Schetterer :
>
Zitat von Robert Schetterer :
Am 16.07.2010 10:15, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Robert Schetterer :
Am 16.07.2010 09:27, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Henrik K :
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I will say generically that for an OP who ha
Am 16.07.2010 10:15, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Zitat von Robert Schetterer :
>
>> Am 16.07.2010 09:27, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
>>> Zitat von Henrik K :
>>>
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> I will say generically that for an OP who has the ti
Zitat von Robert Schetterer :
Am 16.07.2010 09:27, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Henrik K :
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I will say generically that for an OP who has the time, avoiding content
filters and using SMTP time blocking methods is probab
Am 16.07.2010 09:27, schrieb lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
> Zitat von Henrik K :
>
>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>>
>>> I will say generically that for an OP who has the time, avoiding content
>>> filters and using SMTP time blocking methods is probably more
>>> effect
On 16 juil. 2010, at 09:27, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
> In Germany many companies have given up on content filtering because it is
> not allowed to drop mail after accepting, if there is a chance that private
> mail *could* be involved. So with content filter your only choice would be to
> tag
Zitat von Henrik K :
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
I will say generically that for an OP who has the time, avoiding content
filters and using SMTP time blocking methods is probably more
effective in the
long run and makes more efficient use of network and se
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:06:44PM -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> I will say generically that for an OP who has the time, avoiding content
> filters and using SMTP time blocking methods is probably more effective in the
> long run and makes more efficient use of network and server resources.
You
Steve put forth on 7/15/2010 4:16 PM:
> * if you feed wrong data to the Anti-Spam filter then the filter will make
> errors.
Content (header/body) filters have always been error prone and always will be.
The key to success is if the error rate is acceptable. For users to train
them, they have
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 02:09:43 +0300
> Von: Henrik K
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If you lo
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:16:43PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> > >
> > > If you looking for something that is beyond just being better then I
> > > recommend CRM114 or DSPAM or OSBF-Lua. If you insist in having the AV
> > > included in the Anti-Spam tool then use something like DSPAM.
> >
> > I'd consid
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 23:54:22 +0300
> Von: Henrik K
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:02:52PM +0200, Steve wrote:
> >
> > Original-Nachricht --
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 09:02:52PM +0200, Steve wrote:
>
> Original-Nachricht
> > Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:37:48 +0200
> > Von: Ralf Hildebrandt
> > An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> > Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
>
> > *
On 07/15/2010 12:29 PM, Steve wrote:
Or GROSS (the only greylisting application that I know working with a bloom
filter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter)).
http://code.google.com/p/gross/
Thanks for the link, what I see there is very interesting - I'll check
this out...
Joe
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:03:17 -0700
> Von: Bradley Giesbrecht
> An: postfix-users
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> Or sqlgrey, a fork of postgrey.
>
> http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/
>
Or GROSS (the only greyli
Or sqlgrey, a fork of postgrey.
http://sqlgrey.sourceforge.net/
On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Kai Krakow wrote:
Use greylisting, eg postgrey and set it up to work before amavisd-new
or mailscanner.
2010/7/15 Josh Cason
As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
recomendati
Original-Nachricht
> Datum: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 19:37:48 +0200
> Von: Ralf Hildebrandt
> An: postfix-users@postfix.org
> Betreff: Re: Better spam filter for postfix
> * Josh Cason :
>
> > As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
> &g
Use greylisting, eg postgrey and set it up to work before amavisd-new
or mailscanner.
2010/7/15 Josh Cason
>
> As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like recomendations of
> what else to use. I prefer a all in one package like what mailscanner does.
> It also utilizes clamav and
* Josh Cason :
> As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
> recomendations of what else to use. I prefer a all in one package
> like what mailscanner does. It also utilizes clamav and spamassion.
So does amavisd-new
--
Ralf Hildebrandt
Geschäftsbereich IT | Abteilung Netzwerk
As most of you guys know. I use mailscanner. I would like
recomendations of what else to use. I prefer a all in one package like
what mailscanner does. It also utilizes clamav and spamassion. The
problem is most of the information I find on the net is outdated or
for projects that stops. Se
30 matches
Mail list logo
