Fyi, from mail.nac.net:
tempest:/var/log/mail$ zcat maillog.0.gz |grep smtpd | grep " ok " | wc -l
111001
tempest:/var/log/mail$ zcat maillog.0.gz | grep smtpd | grep "BOUNCEMAIL" | wc -l
100
You must be aimed at for spam more often then we are.
On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Peter Green
On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Markus Stumpf wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 04:24:06PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
> > > I'll run this for a few days and let the list know what I find.
>
> While we're on some statistics:
I'll throw mine in, especially since I'm really happy with RBL:
day tcpcont
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 04:24:06PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
> > I'll run this for a few days and let the list know what I find.
While we're on some statistics:
I use the patch that denies MAIL FROM when the domain cannot be
resolved. I have modified tha patch a bit so it logs the denial and
the
James Smallacombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I cannot imagine what damage is done by asking a dialup user to send email
> out through his provider's internal relay.
Some ISPs really suck, but are the only option in some areas?
At home, my ISP wants me to use their SMTP gateway, which delays
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Dave Sill wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >(My pobox.com address, on the other hand, gets plenty of spam, because
> >pobox's antispam methods are very poor. I only wish they used DUL,
> >which would get rid of most of the spam from that direction.)
>
> It's not good
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> My guess has always been that they stay away from .gov because the
> .gov is the one entity that can effectively shut them down.
I think you give spammers too much credit for thinking.
They spam anti-spam lists all the time. Talk about smart.
--Michael
On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 09:31:27AM -0400, Dave Sill wrote:
} [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
}
} >(My pobox.com address, on the other hand, gets plenty of spam, because
} >pobox's antispam methods are very poor. I only wish they used DUL,
} >which would get rid of most of the spam from that direction.)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>(My pobox.com address, on the other hand, gets plenty of spam, because
>pobox's antispam methods are very poor. I only wish they used DUL,
>which would get rid of most of the spam from that direction.)
It's not good enough for an antispam method to simply be effective,
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 07:36:33PM -0400, James Smallacombe wrote:
}
} Not from my experience. They shamelessly spam [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
} or any list or alias that's open.
My guess has always been that they stay away from .gov because the
.gov is the one entity that can effect
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Vern Hart wrote:
> > > to stay away from .gov addresses.
> >
> > So, we finally have THE universal solution against spam!
> > what about opening .forward accounts to everyone ?
> > -- no kidding!
>
> They also seem to stay away from .org addresses as well (for the most
> pa
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Fabrice Scemama wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> (...)
> > Currently I'm using RBL, DUL, and RSS. It stops almost all spam
> > attempts to this machine, but then this is a .gov, and spammers seem
> > to stay away from .gov addresses.
>
> So, we finally have THE univers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(...)
> Currently I'm using RBL, DUL, and RSS. It stops almost all spam
> attempts to this machine, but then this is a .gov, and spammers seem
> to stay away from .gov addresses.
So, we finally have THE universal solution against spam!
what about opening .forward account
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, David Harris wrote:
> I'm thinking of deploying RBL to try to cut down on spam, but before I did that
> I wanted to poke around and see how effective it might be. So, I gathered up
> some spam messages that I had received and looked up the mailserver's ipaddr in
> RBL using r
David Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> I'm going to setup a little program that will query RBL for these addresses
> and then simply record the SMTP conversation with hosts (using recordio)
> that show up as a positive. I can then review those conversations and
> see if I get any false
In the immortal words of David Harris ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> I'm thinking of deploying RBL to try to cut down on spam, but before
> I did that I wanted to poke around and see how effective it might
> be. So, I gathered up some spam messages that I had received and
> looked up the mailserver's i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> dorkslayers no longer exists, AFAIK, having transmorgriphied into
> ORBS. RBL has strict criteria for inclusion, so you won't get all
> that many hits from them. The more effective MAPS services are the
> DUL (dial up list) and the RSS (relay spam stopper). (I used O
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 02:41:43PM -0400, David Harris wrote:
}
} I'm thinking of deploying RBL to try to cut down on spam, but before I did that
} I wanted to poke around and see how effective it might be. So, I gathered up
} some spam messages that I had received and looked up the mailserver's
The DUL and RRSS are more effective, in my experience.
dul.maps.vix.com and relays.radparker.com
For info see
http://maps.vix.com/dul/
http://www.mail-abuse.org/rss/
Jim Lippard [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.discord.org/
Unsolicited bulk email charge: $500/message. Don't send me
I'm thinking of deploying RBL to try to cut down on spam, but before I did that
I wanted to poke around and see how effective it might be. So, I gathered up
some spam messages that I had received and looked up the mailserver's ipaddr in
RBL using rbl.maps.vix.com and rbl.dorkslayers.com, and not
19 matches
Mail list logo
