Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On 12/02/2018 06:54, Rupert Gallagher wrote: A "standard" "obsoleted" by a "proposed standard" or a "draft standard" is nonsense. A standard is obsoleted by a new standard, not a draft or a proposal. RFC 821-822 are still the standard, until their obsoleting drafts and proposals become the new

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

A "standard" "obsoleted" by a "proposed standard" or a "draft standard" is nonsense. A standard is obsoleted by a new standard, not a draft or a proposal. RFC 821-822 are still the standard, until their obsoleting drafts and proposals become the new standard, and are clearly identified as such.

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

You are wrong. Read again. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 22:51, @lbutlr wrote: > On 2018-02-11 (11:15 MST), Rupert Gallagher wrote: > > To you, and those like > you, who claim better knowledge, read twice yourself, because the actual > standard is

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

You confuse the press with the author. Sent from ProtonMail Mobile On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 19:23, Reindl Harald wrote: > Am 11.02.2018 um 19:15 schrieb Rupert Gallagher: > Who is the ignorant here? > > > Rfc 822, standard: usa > Rfc 2822, *proposed standard*: usa not

Re: smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

On 2/11/2018 2:37 PM, David Jones wrote: This mail server has legit email for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com plus a lot of other spam coming out of it. It's listed on a number of RBLs making this very hard to allow ham through and block spam.

Re: smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

> On Feb 11, 2018, at 7:13 PM, David Jones wrote: > > On 02/11/2018 03:56 PM, @lbutlr wrote: >> On 2018-02-11 (12:37 MST), David Jones wrote: >>> >>> Anyone on this list that knows the mail admins/contacts for centurylink.net >>> and embarqmail.com? This mail

Re: smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

On 02/11/2018 03:56 PM, @lbutlr wrote: On 2018-02-11 (12:37 MST), David Jones wrote: Anyone on this list that knows the mail admins/contacts for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com? This mail server has legit email for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com plus a lot of other

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On Sunday 11 February 2018 at 23:04:52, Bill Cole wrote: > On 11 Feb 2018, at 16:20 (-0500), Antony Stone wrote: > > Strange that I can't find SMTP under > > www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/std/std-index.txt > > ‎though, other than STD0060 and STD0071, which are both extensions. > > STD10 is SMTP

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On 11 Feb 2018, at 16:20 (-0500), Antony Stone wrote: Strange that I can't find SMTP under www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/std/std-index.txt ‎though, other than STD0060 and STD0071, which are both extensions. STD10 is SMTP (RFC821), STD11 is message format(RFC822). -- Bill Cole b...@scconsult.com

Re: smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

On 2018-02-11 (12:37 MST), David Jones wrote: > > Anyone on this list that knows the mail admins/contacts for centurylink.net > and embarqmail.com? This mail server has legit email for centurylink.net and > embarqmail.com plus a lot of other spam coming out of it. As a

Re: Barracuda Reputation Block List (BRBL) removal from the SA ruleset

On 11 Feb 2018, at 9:54 (-0500), Benny Pedersen wrote: first query would be valid for 300 secs, but that is imho still not free, problem is that keeping low ttls does not change how dns works, any auth dns servers will upate on soa serial anyway, the crime comes in when sa using remote dns

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On 2018-02-11 (11:15 MST), Rupert Gallagher wrote: > > To you, and those like you, who claim better knowledge, read twice yourself, > because the actual standard is still rfc 822. This statement is entirely false, irresponsibly so. RFC 822 was obsoleted by RFC 2822 and

Re: smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 13:37 -0600, David Jones wrote: > Anyone on this list that knows the mail admins/contacts for  > centurylink.net and embarqmail.com?  This mail server has legit > email  > for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com plus a lot of other spam > coming  > out of it. > David, as you

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On Sunday 11 February 2018 at 19:15:59, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > Who is the ignorant here? > > Rfc 822, standard: usa https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc822 "Obsoleted by: 2822" What do you mean by "Standard: USA"? I know what an IETF Standard is, and it's quite different from an RFC, which we

Re: sa-learn

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 19:09:32 +0100 Hendrik Haddorp wrote: > Hi, > > I have a maildir with about 2 mails. In the past this does not > seem to have been a problem. But since a few weeks my sa-learn > process dies with an OOM now. My server has only 1GB of memory with > another GB for swap.

smtp.centurylink.net 206.152.134.66

Anyone on this list that knows the mail admins/contacts for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com? This mail server has legit email for centurylink.net and embarqmail.com plus a lot of other spam coming out of it. It's listed on a number of RBLs making this very hard to allow ham through and

Re: sa-learn

thanks, I'll give that a try On 11.02.2018 20:15, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 11.02.2018 um 20:10 schrieb Hendrik Haddorp: so far I was always letting it run once a week over my inbox in --ham mode and over my spam folder in --spam mode. all tutorials I saw did it the same way. this also worked

Re: sa-learn

so far I was always letting it run once a week over my inbox in --ham mode and over my spam folder in --spam mode. all tutorials I saw did it the same way. this also worked for years but likely with less mail files. I was under the impression that sa-learn would skip messages that it already

Re: sa-learn

On 11.02.18 19:09, Hendrik Haddorp wrote: I have a maildir with about 2 mails. In the past this does not seem to have been a problem. But since a few weeks my sa-learn process dies with an OOM now. do you run sa-learn over whole maildir all the time? why? My server has only 1GB of memory

Re: sa-learn

it's a small hosted VM running fine for years. On 11.02.2018 19:35, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 11.02.2018 um 19:09 schrieb Hendrik Haddorp: I have a maildir with about 2 mails. In the past this does not seem to have been a problem. But since a few weeks my sa-learn process dies with an OOM

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

Who is the ignorant here? Rfc 822, standard: usa Rfc 2822, *proposed standard*: usa Rfc 5321, *draft standard*: usa Rfc 5322, *draft standard*: usa ... The list goes on. To you, and those like you, who claim better knowledge, read twice yourself, because the actual standard is still rfc 822.

sa-learn

Hi, I have a maildir with about 2 mails. In the past this does not seem to have been a problem. But since a few weeks my sa-learn process dies with an OOM now. My server has only 1GB of memory with another GB for swap. sa-learn is eating up pretty much the complete memory for the run and

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On 2018-02-11 (00:13 MST), Rupert Gallagher wrote: > > Interesting to kreme. Not actually interesting to me, no. > We are not in USA, where RFC loopholes are written to allow the NSA to send > anonymous email with spyware, or companies to profit from massmail marketing.

Re: bug 7549 and 7550

On 2/11/2018 12:04 PM, David Jones wrote: On 02/11/2018 10:12 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote: i would like to see them in corpus score testing, hope some with cla will add it for testing I would be glad to if I knew how.  Is this a sandbox rule?  Do I simply follow this?

Re: bug 7549 and 7550

On 02/11/2018 10:12 AM, Benny Pedersen wrote: i would like to see them in corpus score testing, hope some with cla will add it for testing I would be glad to if I knew how. Is this a sandbox rule? Do I simply follow this? https://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/RuleSandboxes -- David Jones

bug 7549 and 7550

i would like to see them in corpus score testing, hope some with cla will add it for testing

Re: Barracuda Reputation Block List (BRBL) removal from the SA ruleset

Dave Warren skrev den 2018-02-06 20:39: How low are the TTLs? I'm seeing 300 seconds on 127.0.0.2 which is more than sufficient time for a single message to finish processing, such that multiple queries from one message would absolutely be cached (or more likely, the first would still be

Re: Email filtering theory and the definition of spam

On Sunday 11 February 2018 at 08:35:42, Rupert Gallagher wrote: > We are not in USA, where RFC loopholes are written Er, RFCs are written by IETF Working Groups, which are open to *anyone* to contribute to, have members from many different countries and companies around the world, and are not