Re: [SAtalk] [RD] spammer reactions to antidrug (humorous)

On Friday 30 January 2004 05:52 pm, Kelson Vibber wrote: > At 09:04 AM 1/30/2004, Brian Godette wrote: > >Maybe they'll start writting in Middle English to target that untapped > > market of english lit majors/grads. > > I can just see it: > > "Whan thou wouldst gaine the favour of a lass > Thy Pr

Re: [SAtalk] Phoneme and Grammar anti-noise scanning ?

On Wednesday 21 January 2004 12:09 am, John August wrote: > This just an idea, in the tradition of 'I've got a good idea and hope > someone else will carry it through'. I don't expect it, but thought I'd > throw it in :) > > I've noticed a lot of spam which tries to dilute scanners by including a >

Re: [SAtalk] Habeas Responds to Spammer Violation of Habeas Warrant Mark

On Tuesday 13 January 2004 08:17 pm, Dan Kohn wrote: > Most likely scenario is to follow the money trail. Thankfully, the laws to > enforce copyright infringement are quite tough, and include things like > injunctions and seizures. Yes, but couldn't they just claim it was a joe-job? Somebody fra

Re: [SAtalk] Habeas Responds to Spammer Violation of Habeas Warrant Mark

On Tuesday 13 January 2004 12:40 pm, Dan Kohn wrote: > "It is interesting that this spam attack appears to be originating > from a distributed set of zombie cable/DSL modems that someone > likely took over in a past virus attack. If the spammers are using zombies, then couldn't both the spammers

Re: [SAtalk] SA for home use, with POP server at ISP?

On Monday 05 January 2004 01:25 pm, Andrew Lazarewicz wrote: > Is it possible to run SA in my configuration at home? I am techincally > savvy with UNIX / Linux, but not familiar with detailed configuration of > mail servers (e.g., POP, IMAP). I personally use Fetchmail to get the messages from P

[SAtalk] Humor: Legal threats against Spamhaus

Spamhaus has received some rather amusing legal threats from spammers, none of which has ever actually been carried out. These threats are collected at http://www.spamhaus.org/legal/cartoonies.html; good for a laugh. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, a

[SAtalk] Distributed HTTP server blocklist system [dhttp-bl]

An interesting proprosal for a distributed blocklist system. Text found at http://www.sysdesign.ca/dhttp-bl.txt =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Distributed HTTP server blocklist system [dhttp-bl] Copyright (C) 2003 Jem Berkes Posted 2003-09-29 It's clear from spammers' distaste of (and aggression towards)

Re: [SAtalk] Obfuscation using bogus tags in text

On Friday 02 January 2004 10:21 am, Chip Sutton wrote: > We have been receiving a lot of messages that are not being scored high > enough because in addition to the random words, they are obfuscating the > text in the html section with bogus tags. Here is an excerpt from one that > I looked at.

[SAtalk] Spammers respond to CAN-SPAM act

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/30/technology/30spam.html > Not long ago, Mr. Ralsky, like many other bulk e-mailers, had high > hopes that the new federal law would help legitimize his operation. > ... He said that he was counting on Internet providers, in return, > to stop trying to block his mes

Re: [SAtalk] A different approach to spam

On Monday 29 December 2003 01:07 am, Ivar Snaaijer wrote: > Make the spammer pay : > In the article it is mentioned that it seems a Microsoft idea, but I > doubt that directly. Not that there are no good ideas coming from > Redmond, just never new

Re: [SAtalk] Another plea...

On Sunday 23 November 2003 07:40 pm, Rubin Bennett wrote: > Dear list... > > (See what happens when I get a question answered? I come up with > more...) > > Is there (I hope!!!) a way to tell spamd not to accept connections if > the system load is at or above a certain threshold? (i.e. if the sys

[SAtalk] Re: 'random' character sets

On Friday 07 November 2003 06:24 pm, Robert Menschel wrote: > Or better: what if we specified in the rule a maximum score to accumulate > to? Maybe something like: > > accumbody T_SAMPLE /(?:word1|word2|word3|word4|word5)/i,max=2.5 > describe T_SAMPLE Message has medical words frequently used

[SAtalk] Anti-SA article: "ISP Assassin"

http://www.angelfire.com/space/netcensus/ispassassin.html Hmmm... The article claims that SA itself generates spam, since it inserts an "ad" for SA into messages it tags for spam (though I fail to see how a link to http://spamassassin.org/tag/ could be considered an ad). It considers rule des

Re: [SAtalk] Fan Mail!!! LOL We shut one down!

On Tuesday 14 October 2003 08:19 am, Chris Santerre wrote: > Did anyone else get a nasty email this morning? I didn't. I'm feeling left out and unloved. ;-) -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. Advanced SPAM fi

Re: [SAtalk] Trying to create rule . . .

On Monday 18 August 2003 08:11 am, Danita Zanre wrote: > and feeling pretty dumb about it. > > I receive two types of emails that cannot be "whitelisted" by sender, > because the sender is always different. So, I'm trying to create rules > that will give a negative value to a subject line. Here's

Re: [SAtalk] those pesky small v*agra ads

On Thursday 31 July 2003 07:10 pm, ian douglas wrote: > > H, maybe we should make some new rules that test the ratio of > > invisible text to visible text? > > But if the background is BLACK, white text is perfectly acceptable ... > right? > > So defining "visible" vs "invisible" is your toughe

Re: [SAtalk] those pesky small v*agra ads

On Thursday 31 July 2003 03:25 pm, Gary Funck wrote: > As you can see there's extensive use of a white font color which obscures > the many random words that have been inserted in order to subvert signature > checking. > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 > tests=AWL,HTML_60_70,HTML_FONT_IN

Re: [SAtalk] Am I nuts or should this have been flagged differently

On Friday 25 July 2003 11:52 am, Jeff Funk wrote: > Here's a header of an e-mail I just received. The F'word has been replaced > with X's. Isn't there a default rule in SA somewhere that would catch > that? Seems like a pretty obvious nasty to me . . . . No, such a word is commonly used in non-

Re: [SAtalk] Analysing spam mail...

On Sunday 27 July 2003 04:41 am, Bonny wrote: > How may I check spam that wasn't detected by SA and thus add or adjust > SA to catch those messages too? You can look at full headers for the spam, then check out the "X-Spam-Status" header; it will tell you how many hits the message got, and which

Re: [SAtalk] Exit when threshold/score reached

On Wednesday 09 July 2003 05:42 pm, Chris Ochap wrote: > I know I saw the option for spamassassin/spamd to stop scanning once the > appropriate users score has been reached, but I cannot find it again. I > have spamd/spamc running on qmail/vpopmail/maildrop with per user > configs. I don't see it

Re: [SAtalk] How can I receive spam?

On Monday 07 July 2003 12:41 am, Izquierdo, Raul wrote: > Hi, I have installed spamassassin with MySQL based preferences. It > works fine and each user can modify his preferences with a web interface. > Tought it could seem incredible, my problem is to receive spam!. I > know people who

Re: [SAtalk] "Naughty" test names

Hnnn We could add a regexp-type config option for renaming rules and descriptions: rename penis member rename breasts mamaries So you'd end up with: MEMBER_ENLARGE : Information on getting a larger member or mamaries Much simpler would be a censor directive: ce

Re: [SAtalk] SA with Kmail

On Wednesday 25 June 2003 07:51 pm, Robin Lynn Frank wrote: > We are in the process of setting up a new server and until that is finished > we're hauling our mail down with kmail. We have it piping thru SA. The > problem is that things get awfully slow that way. Kmail hangs while it waits for th

Re: [SAtalk] We TEACH you how to SPAM and make a Fortune!!

Heh. Heh. Snicker. BWAHAHAHAHAHA! > ANTI-SPAMMER-PROOF Really? It scored 34.6 for me, or 26.5 with network tests off. > We are directly responsible for up to 70% of the online Viagra and Pharmacy > E-Mail SPAM generated sales on the net today Burn them! Burn them!! -- Give a man a m

Re: [SAtalk] Could stripping bad HTML comments be abused by spammers?

On Monday 02 June 2003 09:10 pm, Patrick Dreker wrote: > Could this probably be abused by enclosing the complete Mail in "<"and ">" > Tags or something similar? So if the whole body ist one big invalid comment > or tag, would the rest of the tests come up empty, because the message body > is emp

Re: [SAtalk] HTML stripping

On Monday 02 June 2003 09:58 am, Stefan wrote: > I get more and more mails which just slip through my patterns because they > contain text of the type > > This is Spam > > This is not matched by a /This is Spam/ body test. But, shouldn't this > actually work when all HTML Tags had been cut out? O

[SAtalk] Re: How to unsubscribe

On Wednesday 08 January 2003 10:33 am, info wrote: > Im trying to get off this list I cant seem to find a way? https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. A

Re: [SAtalk] Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

On Wednesday 08 January 2003 06:23 am, Scot Wilcoxon wrote: > > * Contains images and has a low number of bytes in the text part of > > the message. > > * A low ratio of text to image area. > > I guess I'll have to add narration to my vacation pictures... *Just* having all images shouldn't push

Re: [SAtalk] Hispeedmedia: spam with images as content

On Tuesday 07 January 2003 09:31 am, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > I'm new to SA and not using the devel version 2.50 but 2.43, so maybe > this is already solved there? [snip] > HTML body which builds the message from images only. The devel version has some improvements that will (hopefully) take care

[SAtalk] Spammer gets taste of his own medicine

"West Bloomfield bulk e-mailer Alan Ralsky..." has "been inundated with ads, catalogs and brochures delivered by the U.S. Postal Service to his brand-new $740,000 home." "It's all the result of a well-organized campaign by the anti-spam community, and Ralsky doesn't find it funny." Really? I

Re: [SAtalk] user_prefs to clear report template

On Thursday 05 December 2002 07:46 pm, Victor O'Rear wrote: > How can I stop, preferably at the user_prefs file, spamassassin from > modifying the messages? My users don't mind modifying the subject > line, but HTML mail is destroyed by the email. defang_mime 0 report_header 1 -- Give a man a ma

Re: [SAtalk] Manipulating black/white lists

On Thursday 05 December 2002 12:52 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > Is there a way to tell spamassassin to show me all the email > addresses and thier associated scores that are in my whitelist? I > know how to add and remove them, but I'd also like to know what is > actually in the list

Re: [SAtalk] Question on the list of tests

On Tuesday 26 November 2002 11:16 pm, Rob MacGregor wrote: > Some time back I browsed the list of tests so I could tweak the > values to suit my own particular situation. Yesterday I did this > again but noted that while some descriptions are in English, some are > French and some are other langua

Re: [SAtalk] non-native language spam consistantly sneeking through

On Tuesday 26 November 2002 03:48 pm, Ray Dzek wrote: > Is there way to bias the "native" language scores in SA? I have > notice that a significant portion of the spam that is sneeking past > SA is non-english. The bulk of it looks like it is either spanish or > portuguese. In the SA config file,

Re: [SAtalk] Spammer forums?

On Monday 18 November 2002 03:09 am, Matt Sergeant wrote: > Matthew Cline said the following on 16/11/02 03:14: > > Anyone know some forums or mailing lists where spammers discuss > > their trade? I'd like to take a look at some of them, just out of > > curiosity. >

Re: [SAtalk] Bayes classification: how do I know it's working?

On Friday 22 November 2002 11:08 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > I've setup another server to try out version 2.5.0. I already trained > it to identify spam but not yet non-spam messages. How do I know it's > working? You can't, not until you train it with a non-spam corpus as well. How t

Re: [SAtalk] Kmail & spamassassin.

On Tuesday 19 November 2002 02:02 am, Gregor Hlawacek wrote: > But here comes an other ineteresting question regarding kmail. How > can I use kmail with SA on an IMAP account. There seem to be some > restriction on automated filtering of IMAP Mailboxes and the > possbility to move mails between IM

Re: [SAtalk] Kmail & spamassassin.

On Monday 18 November 2002 12:53 pm, Erik Jakobsen wrote: > Hi. > > I use Kmail here on a SuSE 8.1 system. > > These days I'm trying to set up a spamassassin. > > Is it necessary to run procmail, and if so why is it necessary ?. You can invoke SA from Kmail, but I've found that doing so can make

Re: [SAtalk] Spammer forums?

On Monday 18 November 2002 07:36 am, Justin Mason wrote: > I couldn't read the article though, as I didn't have a login to get > by their auth system. Most of them are password-protected it seems. > These things all seem to go on in hidden or password-protected fora > -- for obvious reasons. He

Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin munges the Content-Type?

On Sunday 17 November 2002 06:16 pm, Philip Mak wrote: > Is there a way to make SpamAssassin not munge the Content-Type of > messages suspected to be spam? (Is there a configuration option for > this, or would I have to edit the source code?) In the config file: defang_mime 0 -- Give a man a ma

[SAtalk] Spammer forums?

Anyone know some forums or mailing lists where spammers discuss their trade? I'd like to take a look at some of them, just out of curiosity. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. Advanced SPAM filtering software:

Re: [SAtalk] Is this a threat? [SA hate mail sent to me]

If you feel like responding, point out SA's scoring system, and how no single test will get a message labled as spam. That SA tags messages if they *look* like spam, and if his "opt-in" messages look like spam, it's the fault of the spammers that opt-in lists get hit as collateral damage. You

Re: [SAtalk] porn spam getting through

On Wednesday 13 November 2002 10:57 am, Matthew Prentice wrote: > If you are not interested in receiving this mail message, please > forward this email to our organization at HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > We in no way wish to send any non-requested email to any persons, >

Re: [SAtalk] listing the whitelist

On Wednesday 13 November 2002 04:07 pm, Ricardo SIGNES wrote: > Is there a simple way to list the contents of the whitelist? I saw a > recent question on this topic in the archives, but no answers. tools/check_whitelist -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire,

Re: [SAtalk] Assigning a higher score?

On Wednesday 13 November 2002 02:32 am, Mark Rubin wrote: > Hello. I've checked out the FAQ but can't seem to find the answer to > this question. I want to assign a massive amount of points to any > emails that have a web bug (WEB_BUGS) in them so they always get > marked as spam. How would I do th

Re: [SAtalk] Skipping tests

On Tuesday 12 November 2002 04:41 pm, Aaron Paetznick wrote: > Does SpamAssassin actually bother to run a check if it's score is set > to zero? I'm wondering if I can disable one or more individual RBL > checks if I set their score to zero. Anybody? > > Thanks in advance! RBL tests, and tests wh

Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin Install base ?

On Thursday 31 October 2002 03:58 am, Frank Smadja wrote: > Hi there, > > Anybody has any idea of how many installs of SA are running ? In total, or just for ISPs and companies/organizations, as opposed to individual users? If for ISPs/comapnies/etc, just the number of installations, or the tota

Re: [SAtalk] You have a secret admirer

Heh, quite an interesting scam. Supposedly set up to prevent the sting of rejection: if you and your "crush" list each other's email addresses as "Interests", then they notify you, and you can get that person's email address for a "small fee". So this encourages you to enter lots of valid ema

Re: [SAtalk] You have a secret admirer

On Wednesday 30 October 2002 04:25 pm, Brian May wrote: > now thats funny! :) You mean someone likes Spamassassin? Probably from SendMail, Exim, or some other mail server. Or maybe it's actually from a spam-ware: "I hated you. Oh, how I hated you, thwarting me at every step, taunting me wit

[SAtalk] "NewsGroups, please help" spam

I just got a piece of spam from someone who claims to need help on how to post to Usenet. It could, theoretically, be a genuine message (though it would be odd to tell someone your age in such a request), but the headers have all sorts of spammy fingerprints all over them, in addition to this

[SAtalk] Amusing autoreply footer

Saw this in an autoreply I just got: > PS: if you are a spammer, forward this to 10 other spammers, then kill > yourself. Hehehe. ;-) -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. Advanced SPAM filtering software: ht

Re: [SAtalk] Interesting Nigerian scam article

On Thursday 24 October 2002 05:39 am, Charles Dennett wrote: > One of the people who replies does so with his tongue firmly planted > in his cheek. I've seen some of them. My favorite Nigerian counter-scam is this guy who pretends to be a anthropologist who gets involved in a Lovecraftian type

Re: [SAtalk] hoax

On Wednesday 23 October 2002 11:56 pm, Tony Johansson wrote: > Hello, > > Does spamassassin protect against hoaxes? It has some rules to detect Nigerian type scams, though it's been less effective at that recently since they've been mutating. Virus hoaxes about deleting certain files, it doesn'

[SAtalk] Interesting Nigerian scam article

http://www.msnbc.com/news/824336.asp?0si= An excerpt: > This swindle is commonly known as "419 fraud," after the section of > the Nigerian penal code covering cons. According to the anti-spam > software vendor Brightmail, 419 come-ons are the Web's second-most > common form of junk mail, ranking

Re: [SAtalk] why fetchmail?

On Monday 14 October 2002 02:41 am, Nancy McGough wrote: > I don't have a fetchmail example to submit, but I have a > question: Why do people use fetchmail rather than getmail or > another method (*)? It seems that getmail avoids this type of > problem because it does not route the mail through t

[SAtalk] [Humor] "This is not a spam"

A funny response to all those spams that say "This is not a spam": http://www.userfriendly.org/cartoons/archives/99aug/19990807.html Heh. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. ICQ: 132152059 | Advanced SPAM filte

Re: [SAtalk] disable razor2?

On Thursday 10 October 2002 02:43 pm, Chris Kurtz wrote: > I'm looking for a way to disable razor2, until I can find out what is > causing it to fail. > > I can't find anything in the docs... > > Ideas? Put this in your local.cf file: score RAZOR2_CHECK 0.0 -- Give a man a match, and he'll be

Re: [SAtalk] New spammer trick (aka: stupid browser trick)

On Tuesday 08 October 2002 02:10 pm, Theo Van Dinter wrote: > I just got some spam that included an URL like: > > http:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Now, we all know the www.yahoo.com bit is a username, but the "hostname" > threw me off. Sure enough, at least IE and Mozilla both convert the > hex to IP.

Re: [SAtalk] URL blacklist

On Monday 30 September 2002 09:20 am, Daniel Rogers wrote: > These message are being sent by (apparently) exploiting machines that have > been subjected to a particular virus, or are in some way vulnerable to this > abuse. I've had two of my dialup users' machines used for this spam in the > las

[SAtalk] Amusing use of the "To" field by spammer

Just got this from a spammer: > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ignore the "@hotmail", and you get "To: Clogged Septic Tank Owner". Hehe. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the

Re: [SAtalk] Re: spammers whitelisting themselves

On Wednesday 25 September 2002 12:42 pm, Scott Henderson wrote: > From: Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Amavisd-new has its own SMTP sender whitelist. Check your > >amavisd.conf file. > Sorry, I neglected to mention. I have looked there too. Nothing > in there. The problem is hiding somew

Re: [SAtalk] Combination scoring?

On Tuesday 24 September 2002 06:30 am, Matt Sergeant wrote: > Neulinger, Nathan wrote: > > Does SA do any scoring based on the combination of rules? > > Yes. See perldoc Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf. Specifically, meta rules. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fir

Re: [SAtalk] How the hell to do accept all mail from my domain ?

On Friday 13 September 2002 02:47 am, Martin Warnes wrote: > try: > > whitelist_from *enseirb.fr That will let any spam that's forged at from "enseirb.fr" through. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. ICQ: 1321

Re: [SAtalk] Graphics-only spam?

On Wednesday 24 July 2002 09:43 am, Michael Moncur wrote: > This would be an easy rule to add to SA but I'm wondering about speed - > stripping HTML tags is a messy regexp and SA already does this. Is there a > way for the same eval test to access the 'rawbody' and 'body' parts at the > same time

Re: [SAtalk] Graphics-only spam?

On Wednesday 24 July 2002 06:49 pm, Tony L. Svanstrom wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 the voices made Matthew Cline write: > > On Wednesday 24 July 2002 09:02 am, Hess, Mtodd, /mth wrote: > > > I hate to bring this up, but I see more and more spams that contain > > >

Re: [SAtalk] Graphics-only spam?

On Wednesday 24 July 2002 09:02 am, Hess, Mtodd, /mth wrote: > I hate to bring this up, but I see more and more spams that contain very > little, if any, text. Instead, most of the spam text is in a graphic > image. How will we be able to detect those as spam? OCR? There have been suggestions f

Re: [SAtalk] Whitelist

On Saturday 13 July 2002 10:20 pm, Chris Ogles wrote: > Can someone help me with whitelisting... > > whitelist_from"*@lists.sourceforge.net", > "*@ummail4.unitedmedia.com", "*@my-etrust.com" Don't put quotes around the addresses, and don't separate addresses with commas. -- Giv

Re: [SAtalk] How to tell if dcc tests are working?

On Friday 12 July 2002 10:51 pm, mark wrote: > The SpamAssassin help file lists some information about installing > dccproc for spam testing. > Is there a way to tell if and how well the dcc tests are working? Add "dcc_add_header 1" to your user_prefs or local.cf file; then spam going through SA

Re: [SAtalk] Seeking a cure for thrashing

On Friday 05 July 2002 06:55 pm, Bart Schaefer wrote: > Which version of spamassassin do you have installed? I've been using -m > since 2.20 ... Ooops. The spamd manpage in my manpath must be old; my bad. -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll b

Re: [SAtalk] Seeking a cure for thrashing

On Friday 05 July 2002 05:44 pm, Bart Schaefer wrote: > Spamd forks on each connection, so this won't lighten the load unless you > use the -m option to limit the number of forked copies. I use -m 3 on a > P233 with 128MB and that seems to deal with fetchmail floods just fine. On > the other han

Re: [SAtalk] Seeking a cure for thrashing

On Friday 05 July 2002 03:54 pm, Joseph Barillari wrote: > Hello. > > I'm curious as to how one might limit the number of simultaneous > spamassassin processes. If you're using Qmail to deliver mail locally, you can create the control file "concurrencylocal", put in an interger, and it will neve

Re: [SAtalk] INVESTMENT ASSISTANCE

On Wednesday 04 July 2001 09:56 pm, BASSY OKON wrote: > (b) That you would treat this transaction with utmost secrecy and > confidentiality. Which is why you sent this to a mailing list... You know, I'm suprised at how little spam gets sent through mailing lists. It wouldn't be that hard to w

Re: [SAtalk] Spam that gets through

On Monday 01 July 2002 07:00 am, Weyland wrote: > I have a few Spams that are *very* obviously > porn spams that made it through SA. > > How can I tell SA to look for the > words contaned in it in the future? You can try to figure out which porn phrases aren't being picked up by SA, then add the

Re: [SAtalk] Interview with "Spam King" Scelson

On Monday 01 July 2002 06:04 pm, Michael Stauber wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > Right, we're dictators, *forcing* our concerns on the masses > > *yearning* for email advertisements, and he's a freedom fighter. Or > > something. > I'm fully with you in the trenches on this one, Matthew. FWIW: I've be

[SAtalk] Interview with "Spam King" Scelson

http://www.ctnow.com/technology/hc-sp1scelsonjun30.story?coll=hc-headlines-home > The program allows him to control every aspect of the outgoing > e-mail - including masking the sender, randomly changing the subject > line or disguising the point of origin. A legitamit business which needs

[SAtalk] Spamdemic Map by CluelessMailers.org

A *huge* map showing the relationship between spammers. http://www.cluelessmailers.org/spamdemic/mapfullsize.html -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. ICQ: 132152059 ---

Re: [SAtalk] X- references in headers

On Saturday 22 June 2002 11:58 am, Danita Zanre wrote: > I guess the 2.4 points for giving our customers a way to actually > remove themselves from our LEGITIMATE mailing list really puts us over > the top . Yes. The unsubscribe notice on Yahoo! Groups mailing lists messages gives an *4* point

Re: [SAtalk] X- references in headers

On Friday 21 June 2002 06:08 pm, Bart Schaefer wrote: > Here's an article that explains about "appending," a technique that seems > appealing to the naive marketer but often ends up turning them into an > "unintentional" spammer: > > http://www.clickz.com/em_mkt/opt/article.php/1367711 >Fr

Re: [SAtalk] custom subject rule

On Thursday 20 June 2002 10:41 am, Duncan Findlay wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2002 at 10:31:34AM -0700, Steve Thomas wrote: > > I've added a couple of custom rules to our local.cf for industry-specific > > terms. So far I've set up one rule for the subject and one for the body > > for each 'keyword

Re: [SAtalk] New porn rule

On Thursday 20 June 2002 07:28 am, Darren Coleman wrote: > body PORN_15 > /\b(?:horse?s|snake?s|eel?s|dog(?:gy)?s)[ -]?fuck(?:ing)|cum[ -]?shot?s|bl > ow[ -]?job?s/i > describe PORN_15Uses words and phrases which indicate porn > (15) That would match any message with "horses"

Re: [SAtalk] SpamAssassin with large email providers...?

On Wednesday 19 June 2002 12:54 am, Jeremy Howard wrote: > To use SpamAssassin in a production environment, we do a number of > optimisations. We patched Net::DNS to remove the use of $& , which > speeds up all SA regexp matches by orders of magnitude. I can't find '$&' in any of the Net::DNS ve

[SAtalk] Some ratware-spam commentary...

Thought I'd comment on a spam-advertising-spam I just got. Interestingly, even with a fake "Re: Order Confirmation" subject that took of 3 points from the spam score, it *still got a score of 53.9 > 1) Let's say you... Sell a $24.95 PRODUCT or SERVICE. > 2) Let's say you... Broadcast Email FREE t

Re: [SAtalk] Evaluation of 2.30 GA scores

On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:31 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Michael Moncur wrote: > MM> score ASCII_FORM_ENTRY -1.660 > > Looks like lots of false positives on the appended lines at the bottom of > Sourceforge mailing list messages. This score should probably be pumped up > a little

Re: [SAtalk] Razor Compatability

On Saturday 15 June 2002 12:47 am, Jim Scott wrote: > Ok I have just installed on a new machine SpamAssassin 2.30 and Razor 2.x > and SpamAssassin is reporting that razor is not found. Does the version of > SpamAssassin support Razor 2.x? No, because Razor 2.x uses the Razor2 Perl package, while

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam

On Friday 14 June 2002 06:45 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Some quick answers (then I'm going home to sleep) Sleep. Sleep is good. ;-) > The Outlook contacts import-to-whitelist feature is almost certainly > going to make it into 1.0, as will some toolbar buttons for > "Spam/Not Spam" which user

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

On Friday 14 June 2002 06:27 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Matthew Cline wrote: > > MC> On Friday 14 June 2002 05:49 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > MC> > MC> > Viking: spam song > MC> > Dentist: Tooth hurty > MC> > MC> Spam hurts your teeth? > >

Re: [SAtalk] Deersoft Emerges to Combat Spam

I'm an editor at the Open Directory Project, so I'll submit the DeerSoft URL to the appropriate category. To do that, I need to know if SpamAssasin Pro is shareware or just normal proprietary software. Also, there's a bunch of sites under http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Abuse/Spam/ that sh

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

On Friday 14 June 2002 05:49 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Viking: spam song > Dentist: Tooth hurty Spam hurts your teeth? -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. ICQ: 132152059

Re: [SAtalk] Release 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) announcement

On Friday 14 June 2002 04:46 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Ok, 2.30 is now official. > SpamAssassin 2.30 (Viking dentist ˆ l'orange) Released! > --- Viking dentist a l'orange? OK, I guess you incoprorated my "Vikings singing the Spam s

Re: [SAtalk] Obfuscation escalation

On Friday 14 June 2002 04:17 am, Bill Becker wrote: > We may need expanded rules to handle obfuscation. The following > javascript decodes into another obfuscation javasscript. I didn't have > time to persue it further (what the sender is counting on i suppose)... [snip] > ...the body part of

Re: [SAtalk] Trick to bypass Razor

On Thursday 13 June 2002 07:34 am, Fred Inklaar wrote: > Look at the next 3 mails, that were received by an address that > auto-reports to Razor. Usually when I receive multiple instances of the > same spam, all but the first are listed in Razor (the one that was > reported). > In this case howev

[SAtalk] Asian language spam not in Razor and DCC?

>From my (limited) experience, it seems that the Asian language spam I get isn't listed in Razor or DCC when I get it. Is this just chance, or could there be a reason for it? I don't think that I'd be among the first to get every copy of Asian spam. Maybe most of the people who are first-repo

Re: [SAtalk] Cool release name for 2.30

On Tuesday 11 June 2002 08:28 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > or famous martial aritists > > Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris, Jackie Chan, etc. > How about famous "real" martial artists as against media hyped ones? Or even fictional ones. * Grasshopper (Kung Fu) * Samurai

Re: [SAtalk] C version

On Monday 10 June 2002 07:42 am, Vivek Khera wrote: > >>>>> "MC" == Matthew Cline <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > MC> automatically compile Perl down to machine instructions for improved > MC> performance. So it probably wouldn't be worth it to

Re: [SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for nonspam.log submissions

On Sunday 09 June 2002 11:09 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > you are a nonspam.log submitter, please check out that tag from CVS using: Why just the nonspam.log? -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but set him on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. ICQ: 132152059

Re: [SAtalk] Freeze for 2.30, call for nonspam.log submissions

On Sunday 09 June 2002 11:09 pm, Craig R Hughes wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts for a cool release name for 2.30? I just (finally) saw the Lord of the Rings movie, so Tolkien-esque names spring to mind. "Mordor"? ("Mordor, where the spammers lie") "Sauron"? ("The unblinking eye of Sauron,

Re: [SAtalk] C version

On Sunday 09 June 2002 03:53 pm, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: > The real problem you have is not so much spamd's performance, but the > fact that it sits idle 99% of the time, then gets slammed with 1K > messages in a matter of seconds. Even with my Duron 750 and not much > else happening, the b

Re: [SAtalk] C version

On Sunday 09 June 2002 03:06 pm, Sean Rima wrote: > My ISP is also looking at SA but performance maybe a problem. When Perl 6 comes out, it will have a Just In Time (JIT) compiler, which will automatically compile Perl down to machine instructions for improved performance. So it probably woul

[SAtalk] Ammusingly misconfigured spam software

Just got some spam with the subject "Approved for $5000...For $user only", and in the body "Your approval is finally here $user" "$user". Boy, it makes me feel so special, how they pernsolize the message with my name and all... -- Give a man a match, and he'll be warm for a minute, but s

Re: [SAtalk] Average Spam Size?

On Thursday 06 June 2002 09:12 pm, Jeremy Zawodny wrote: > Does anyone with a large spam collection have good stats on the > average message size? > I ask because I've been playing with the procmail rules that we use to > call spamc/spamd on wcnet.org a bit. I'm to the point now where I only > se

  1   2   3   >