Spam attacks

2009-03-02 Thread Dave Johnson
Hi all Is there anyway of stopping the from "j...@foo.com" to "j...@foo.com" spam attacks? Regards

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-02 Thread Paweł Leśniak
W dniu 2009-03-03 08:25, Dave Johnson pisze: Hi all Is there anyway of stopping the from "j...@foo.com" <mailto:from...@foo.com> to "j...@foo.com" spam attacks? Hi Without knowing your config it's hard to say what are you already doing. Are you using SASL

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread Noel Jones
Dave Johnson wrote: Hi all Is there anyway of stopping the from "j...@foo.com" <mailto:from...@foo.com> to "j...@foo.com" spam attacks? Regards If you're not using zen.spamhaus.org already, you should start. If your site is too large to qualify for their f

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread Paweł Leśniak
W dniu 2009-03-03 17:46, Noel Jones pisze: Some people reject their own domain from outside, unauthenticated clients, but this will certainly reject some amount of legit mail. Could you write a little bit how is it possible to reject legit mail by rejecting unauthenticated clients when all use

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread Gerardo Herzig
Dave Johnson wrote: > Hi all > > Is there anyway of stopping the from "j...@foo.com" to "j...@foo.com" spam > attacks? > > Regards > > > Well. If you are delivering via procmail, you can have a procmail rule like this one (untested, and posibly

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread Gerardo Herzig
Paweł Leśniak wrote: > W dniu 2009-03-03 17:46, Noel Jones pisze: >> Some people reject their own domain from outside, unauthenticated >> clients, but this will certainly reject some amount of legit mail. > > Could you write a little bit how is it possible to reject legit mail by > rejecting unaut

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread Noel Jones
Paweł Leśniak wrote: W dniu 2009-03-03 17:46, Noel Jones pisze: Some people reject their own domain from outside, unauthenticated clients, but this will certainly reject some amount of legit mail. Could you write a little bit how is it possible to reject legit mail by rejecting unauthenticate

RE: Spam attacks

2009-03-03 Thread MacShane, Tracy
> -Original Message- > From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org > [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Pawel Lesniak > Sent: Wednesday, 4 March 2009 4:19 AM > To: postfix users list > Subject: Re: Spam attacks > > W dniu 2009-03-03 17:46, Noel Jone

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
W dniu 2009-03-03 23:34, MacShane, Tracy pisze: We have a very clear policy that users are only permitted to relay mail from our networks. If they are sending from home, they use webmail. We've had one or two instances where external organisations have used some kind of auto-reply mechanism whic

FW: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Dave Johnson
Subject: Re: Spam attacks W dniu 2009-03-03 23:34, MacShane, Tracy pisze: We have a very clear policy that users are only permitted to relay mail from our networks. If they are sending from home, they use webmail. We've had one or two instances where external organisations have used some

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
W dniu 2009-03-03 18:41, Noel Jones pisze: Some legit "reminder" type services, some meeting notifications, and other legit mail might arrive with you as the sender. Maybe not best practices, but it's legit mail and such a policy will reject it. Why would someone want to fake sender address? Is

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Noel Jones
> --- Original Message --- > From: Paweł Leśniak > I cant's see any risk anyways, not just in place. And it's possible that > zen BL will stop more "legit" mails (depends on what one means by "legit > mail", maybe there are people who read those "I'll give you $1billion" > mails). If I'

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
I can state with authority that mail with sender==recipient is not universally 100% spam, and such a policy would likely have a much higher false positive rate than zen. You can argue it's a misconfiguration of the sender, but a mail admin's job is to receive legit mail. but you're welcome to

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Noel Jones
Paweł Leśniak wrote: I think that situations pointed by you are rather rare. I see them often enough here that I can't reject based solely on this criteria, but I do add a couple spamassassin points. If it's rare at your site, lucky you. I don't know of any, so I'm fine with rejecting 0 le

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread /dev/rob0
On Wed March 4 2009 08:48:18 Paweł Leśniak wrote: > But then we come to definition of spam. It's in simple words unwanted > message. Too simple, and not correct. The true definition of spam is UBE: unsolicited bulk email. Most spammers put out messages that a tiny percentage of recipients want t

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
On Wed March 4 2009 08:48:18 Paweł Leśniak wrote: But then we come to definition of spam. It's in simple words unwanted message. Too simple, and not correct. The true definition of spam is UBE: unsolicited bulk email. Most spammers put out messages that a tiny percentage of recipient

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Charles Marcus
On 3/4/2009, PaweB Le[niak (warl...@lesniakowie.com) wrote: > Looking at first email in thread carefully you'd see that Dave has > (or had) problem with spam sent from j...@foo.com to j...@foo.com. And > that's the case where authentication will do the job perfectly - IMHO > way better then zen.

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
On 3/4/2009, PaweB Le[niak (warl...@lesniakowie.com) wrote: Looking at first email in thread carefully you'd see that Dave has (or had) problem with spam sent from j...@foo.com to j...@foo.com. And that's the case where authentication will do the job perfectly - IMHO way better then zen.

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread mouss
Paweł Leśniak a écrit : > W dniu 2009-03-03 18:41, Noel Jones pisze: >> Some legit "reminder" type services, some meeting notifications, and >> other legit mail might arrive with you as the sender. Maybe not best >> practices, but it's legit mail and such a policy will reject it. > Why would someo

RE: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread MacShane, Tracy
From: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org [mailto:owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org] On Behalf Of Pawel Lesniak Sent: Wednesday, 4 March 2009 7:32 PM To: postfix users list Subject: Re: Spam attacks W dniu 2009-03-03 23:34, MacShane, Tracy pisze

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Mihira Fernando
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 20:18:18 Paweł Leśniak wrote: [snip] > Sure. I'm sending myself emails sometime. But I'm using server which is > permitted to send with address from my domain. So that's surely not 100% > spam when sender eq recipient. But then we come to definition of spam. It's in simp

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-05 Thread Paweł Leśniak
W dniu 2009-03-05 06:30, Mihira Fernando pisze: Have you ever tried sending an e-greeting to someone via 123greeting.com or some other similar site ? You're definitely right - I didn't use that one before. Look what I get in logs: Mar 5 09:41:50 lola postfix/smtpd[20278]: warning: 72.233.20

Re: Spam attacks

2009-03-05 Thread mouss
Paweł Leśniak a écrit : > W dniu 2009-03-05 06:30, Mihira Fernando pisze: >> Have you ever tried sending an e-greeting to someone via >> 123greeting.com or >> some other similar site ? >> > You're definitely right - I didn't use that one before. > Look what I get in logs: > Mar 5 09:41:50 lola

Re: FW: Spam attacks

2009-03-04 Thread Paweł Leśniak
Hi all Just to clarify some points They are running an IMAP server with SASL login for remote users IMAP let's you get mail from your account. So it's really not related to your problem. You'd have to use SMTP authentication so when one wants to send mail from u...@example.com to anotheru..

how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-26 Thread deconya
Hi list Im with the next problem: I have and old server and Im in process to migrate to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server than saturate it. For the age of the server and because in two weeks is replaced I can't install any program like spamity or similar to

Re: how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-26 Thread Terry Carmen
> Hi list > > Im with the next problem: I have and old server and Im in process to migrate to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server than saturate it. For the age of the server and because in two weeks is replaced I can't install any program like spam

Re: how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-26 Thread Wietse Venema
deconya: > Hi list > > Im with the next problem: I have and old server and Im in process to migrate > to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server than > saturate it. For the age of the server and because in two weeks is replaced > I can't i

Re: how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-26 Thread Scott Haneda
m in process to migrate to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server than saturate it. For the age of the server and because in two weeks is replaced I can't install any program like spamity or similar to help to detect spam attacks, but I need to understand th

Re: how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-27 Thread deconya
old server and Im in process to > migrate > > to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server > than > > saturate it. For the age of the server and because in two weeks is > replaced > > I can't install any program like spamity or simila

Re: how to detect spam attacks

2009-04-27 Thread deconya
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Terry Carmen wrote: > >> >> > Hi list >> > >> > Im with the next problem: I have and old server and Im in process to >> migrate >> > to a better machine, but actually Im having spam attacks in the server >&