On 17.01.09 11:27, RobertH wrote:
> why not consider a phish a type of malware, it is bad code and you will
> realistically get bad code on your workstation if you go there and start
> clicking OK etc
I do, but some others do not, so they scan two times...
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantom
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 01:58:48AM +0100, mouss wrote:
> > Then I should use postfix regexp capabilities to rewrite subject and
> > replace
> > [SPAM] with [VIRII] in case X-Spam-Virus: Yes
>
> If you mean header_checks, you can't. header_checks operate on headers
> ONE at a time. you can't tell
Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz a écrit :
> Then I should use postfix regexp capabilities to rewrite subject and replace
> [SPAM] with [VIRII] in case X-Spam-Virus: Yes
>
If you mean header_checks, you can't. header_checks operate on headers
ONE at a time. you can't tell it to rewrite the subject based
On Sat, 17 Jan 2009, CyborgPrime wrote:
I looked at the email file and the SA is scoring the spam, but for some
reason it is not having the [spam] tag appended to the subject. Is that
something that a procmail recipe must add?
There are SpamAssassin options to rewrite the subject header, the
I looked at the email file and the SA is scoring the spam, but for some
reason it is not having the [spam] tag appended to the subject. Is that
something that a procmail recipe must add?
Karsten Bräckelmann-2 wrote:
>
> SpamAssassin merely scans the mail it gets fed and assigns a score.
> What
..and you are only assuming I have not read the docs- In fact I read the docs
and setup the program myself, so I do know a bit about how it works. Still
doesn't answer my question.
Kai Schaetzl wrote:
>
> "*You* want to know something. You were told what the first thing is you
> can do
> for
>
> I find it very silly to try anything but rejecting of the virus.
>
> (unless as was stated before it's a phish, which is not a virus)
> --
> Matus UHLAR
we would agree, yet we take it a lil farther.
we smtp reject spam and virus and other signatures etc.
if a client had sincerely diffe
On 17.01.09 12:19, Luis Daniel Lucio Quiroz wrote:
> Then I should use postfix regexp capabilities to rewrite subject and
> replace [SPAM] with [VIRII] in case X-Spam-Virus: Yes
I find it very silly to try anything but rejecting of the virus.
(unless as was stated before it's a phish, which is no
Then I should use postfix regexp capabilities to rewrite subject and replace
[SPAM] with [VIRII] in case X-Spam-Virus: Yes
Thanks
LD
On Friday 16 January 2009 00:38:07 Evan Platt wrote:
> At 08:53 PM 1/15/2009, you wrote:
> >Thanks, it works
> >
> >How ever I have a question. In my configurati
Bogun Dmitriy пишет:
I have upgraded to 3.59(was 3.56). But it not help... it still not
converting body and not match my test rule. I have tried with utf8,
koi8-r, cp1251... all not working. But when I have disabled
normalize_charset, message in UTF8 hit into my rule... all
other(koi8-r,cp1251
CyborgPrime wrote on Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:54:22 -0800 (PST):
> Instead of having me guess what you want- maybe you should just tell me what
> you want to know?
*You* want to know something. You were told what the first thing is you can do
for debugging. So, do that. However, you apparently are no
Benny Pedersen wrote on Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:09:27 +0100 (CET):
> i got one mail today
Post a sample on web? ;-)
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
12 matches
Mail list logo
