On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 09:38:13PM -0400, James Pratt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Michael Scheidell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 9:00 PM
To: spamassassin-users
Subject: Re: Looking for hosts to white list
I don't know if you noticed but I'm
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:50:33PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
What I'm looking to do with host name base white lists is use forward
confirmed RDNS to keep certian domain from being accidentally blacklisted.
What's funny is that you already mentioned this a bunch of times, but it
seems people
Hi
Running SA3.2.3 but seeing a lot of bounced emails being sent to my
customers. (not emails they are sending out but faked returns)
various subjects
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mail Delivery System)
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Delivery Status
On 23.04.08 08:42, Obantec Support wrote:
Running SA3.2.3 but seeing a lot of bounced emails being sent to my
customers. (not emails they are sending out but faked returns)
various subjects
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mail Delivery System)
Subject: Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender
Henrik K wrote:
What's funny is that you already mentioned this a bunch of times, but it
seems people ignore you, since they didn't seem to get it. ;)
While Marc is a bit eccentric, it would be nice to see what would be the
result if someone actually worked with him to better the stuff.
How
-Original Message-
From: Henrik K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 2:45 AM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Looking for hosts to white list
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 09:38:13PM -0400, James Pratt wrote:
-Original Message-
From:
On Wed, April 23, 2008 02:03, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
fwiw, generally speaking, a uribl whitelist is just a list of domains
that shouldn't be blacklisted. it does not imply a list of domains that
should be considered non-spam and therefore gain negative points from
SA via some
I noticed that FROM_LOCAL_HEX scores more often on legit mail than
on spam. Specifically it hits on Myspace invitations and some type
of group mail from Gmail, which are both common. It also hits on
a few verp sender addresses from random sites that appear to be
legit, and verp may become
Henrik K wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 07:50:33PM -0700, Marc Perkel wrote:
What I'm looking to do with host name base white lists is use forward
confirmed RDNS to keep certian domain from being accidentally blacklisted.
What's funny is that you already mentioned this a bunch of
On 23.04.08 09:27, Joseph Brennan wrote:
I noticed that FROM_LOCAL_HEX scores more often on legit mail than
on spam. Specifically it hits on Myspace invitations and some type
of group mail from Gmail, which are both common. It also hits on
a few verp sender addresses from random sites that
Marc Perkel writes:
Yep - one of the ideas I originated here is this list is the idea of
blocking spam based on linking to spam sites. It took almost 1 1/2 tears
of talking about it before others picked up on the idea and turned it into
URI blacklists. If you can find old message from around
Justin Mason wrote:
sorry Marc, you weren't the first to come up with that idea.
He didn't say that he was, just that he was the first to raise it on the
list.
Jon
Jon Armitage wrote:
Justin Mason wrote:
sorry Marc, you weren't the first to come up with that idea.
He didn't say that he was, just that he was the first to raise it on
the list.
Jon
It may have been 2001. But at the time I remember saying that all spam
wants you to do something
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2008-04-23 10:48
To: Marc Perkel
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Looking for hosts to white list
Marc Perkel writes:
Yep - one of the ideas I originated here is this list is the idea
Chris Santerre wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 2008-04-23 10:48
To: Marc Perkel
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Looking for hosts to white list
Marc Perkel writes:
Yep - one of the ideas I originated here is
So, when I used sa-update to grab additional rule sets, I could tell
they were being used by scanning my mail logs for references to them.
Yup, they're hitting.
Now, I have sa-compile implemented. I understand that spamassassin
automatically sees alternate rules and uses them rather than the
Henrik K wrote:
Marc
Perkel. Marc is a leader in the spam filtering industry and was behind
Has/Does anyone use his sa rules he has posted on his site? if so how,
how was the accuracy?
http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-usersm=120611144819910w=2
I tried the hostkarma lists,
Benny Pedersen wrote:
On Tue, April 22, 2008 23:47, Marc Perkel wrote:
I'm looking for people who are running URI blacklists, but I'm more
interested in your whitelist information. I have an extensive list
myself and looking for partners to swap data with.
but uribl.com have a hidded
Dear Spamassassin Users list:
I'm running version 3.2.4. A couple of weeks ago, in response to a
blowback storm, I turned on the VBounce ruleset, setting whitelist_bounce_relays
as described on the wiki. I filtered ANY_BOUNCE_MESSAGE to its own folder,
so I could keep an eye on it.
This
Snip
If anyone has tested HostKarma already... and found it promising, but a
little lacking... I suggest testing it again. It is even better now.
In fact, most DNSBLs do not suddenly come on the scene perfect. Most
have had MUCH growing pains. Therefore, all newer DNBSLs shouldn't
Robert - elists wrote:
Snip
If anyone has tested HostKarma already... and found it promising, but a
little lacking... I suggest testing it again. It is even better now.
In fact, most DNSBLs do not suddenly come on the scene perfect. Most
have had MUCH growing pains. Therefore,
Jo Rhett wrote:
Matt Kettler wrote:
There's nothing in trusted networks, I don't trust anything...
Jo, that's impossible in spamassasin. You cannot have an empty trust,
it doesn't make any logical sense, and would cause spamassassin to
fail miserably.
I should rather have said trust is
Yes Marc
Please start a JMF general support maillist for those that want to be part
of it.
Make sure it cannot become a spam forum in itself and is truly opt in with
verify
I highly suggest that you post to it frequently, before any major or minor
changes to JMF hardware or software
I'm starting to see some new phishing/scam attempts.
What I was thinking was that it might be worthwhile to add a rule to not
so much check links, but count periods.
I was going to put in the web address that I received as an example, but I think
that's why this is a second attempt - the
Hi there
I'm getting more and more valid email from Windows environments that
have been totally encoded in BASE64. Mixtures of Unicode and
forwarding/replying seems to trigger things like Exchange to just
re-encode the whole thing as Base64.
Looking through our logs I can see a fair amount
25 matches
Mail list logo
