On Thursday 13 July 2006 08:31, Sietse van Zanen took the opportunity to
write:
> And that trick could also very well cause you to loose legitimate
> e-mail..
As long as the senders' MTAs are RFC compliant nothing bad can happen unless
all real MXes go down, and in that case there is no dif
From: "Michael Scheidell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Guess too much time in Miami and the Cuba Coffee.. ;-)
by the way, watch our for jokes, then can get archived in google, and 4
years from now, someone will try to stop spam, find your post and
implement it.
don't think so? I set up a 'joke' RBL
Michael Scheidell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 7:14 PM
To: SpamAssassin Users List
Subject: RE: The best way to use Spamassassin is to not use
Spamassassin
From: John D. Hardin
|don't think so? I set up a 'joke' RBL, announced it AS a joke, told
| everyone it listed all of ipv4 with a wildcard entry, and 3 years later,
| I still get calls from 'lawyers' .
|
| google for 'blocked.secnap.net' and see what I mean.
| (it even got into several of the anti-spam perl .pm file
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> Guess too much time in Miami and the Cuba Coffee.. ;-)
*envy*
> by the way, watch our for jokes, then can get archived in google,
> and 4 years from now, someone will try to stop spam, find your
> post and implement it.
Ja. Oh, well.
> don't th
Guess too much time in Miami and the Cuba Coffee.. ;-)
by the way, watch our for jokes, then can get archived in google, and 4
years from now, someone will try to stop spam, find your post and
implement it.
don't think so? I set up a 'joke' RBL, announced it AS a joke, told
everyone it lis
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> John D. Hardin wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> >
> >> From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>> ...ewww! His leg came right off. *pop*.
> >>>
> >>> Now what do I do with it?
> >>>
> >> You CAN
John D. Hardin wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
...ewww! His leg came right off. *pop*.
Now what do I do with it?
You CAN'T point it at an rfc1918 address (10/8 127/8, 192.168/16,
On Fri, 14 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > ...ewww! His leg came right off. *pop*.
> >
> > Now what do I do with it?
>
> You CAN'T point it at an rfc1918 address (10/8 127/8, 192.168/16,
> 172.16/21) or you will end up in the bogusmx b
> -Original Message-
> From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 7:14 PM
> To: SpamAssassin Users List
> Subject: RE: The best way to use Spamassassin is to not use
> Spamassassin
>
>
>
> > From: John D
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Michael Scheidell wrote:
> From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > doesn't work the skip it and move on. I get rid of 120,000
> > > spams a day
> > > using that trick.
> >
> > Ooo. Set it to maila.microsoft.com... {evil grin}
>
> Not a good idea, since mai
> -Original Message-
> From: John D. Hardin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 9:52 AM
> To: Marc Perkel
> Cc: Bart Schaefer; users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Re: The best way to use Spamassassin is to not use
> Spamassassin
>
>
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Marc Perkel wrote:
> Depends on what he's doing it might work. I catch most spam based on
> sender behavior rather than message content. For example, anyone can do
> this trick. Set your highest MX record (add a new one) to an IP address
> that doesn't exist. Some spammers
* Marc Perkel wrote (12/07/06 18:30):
Catchy subject line eh?
OK - so what I mean by this is that I now use SA for about 5% of all
incoming email. The reaso of spam is rejected before I get to SA through
a fairly large number of tricks that allow me to determine with near
100% accuracy things
On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Depends on what he's doing it might work.
He's writing procmail recipes. He's a user on a hosted shell server,
not a sysadmin. Strictly delivery-time header text analysis, no
MTA-level configuration games.
For example, anyone can do this t
arc Perkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 13-Jul-06 8:18
To: Bart Schaefer
Cc: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: The best way to use Spamassassin is to not use Spamassassin
Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Bart Sc
Bart Schaefer wrote:
On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bart Schaefer wrote:
> There's been a fellow over on the procmail list claiming for well over
> a year now that he can get better accuracy than SA through message
> header analysis alone
His claim might well be true.
O
On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bart Schaefer wrote:
> There's been a fellow over on the procmail list claiming for well over
> a year now that he can get better accuracy than SA through message
> header analysis alone
His claim might well be true.
Oh, I have no doubt that
Bart Schaefer wrote:
On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Catchy subject line eh?
What you really mean is "the best way to use SpamAssassin is as an
analysis tool."
Which of course is what the best way to use it always was. You're
just abstracting the analysis rather than app
Rob Poe wrote:
Of course that 5% is very important because that is where I get the
data
for the other tests that allow me to bypass filtering. But - I want
you
all to start thinking of a new way to look at spam filtering. I have
some concepts
On 7/12/06, Marc Perkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Catchy subject line eh?
What you really mean is "the best way to use SpamAssassin is as an
analysis tool."
Which of course is what the best way to use it always was. You're
just abstracting the analysis rather than applying it directly.
The
>Of course that 5% is very important because that is where I get the
data
>for the other tests that allow me to bypass filtering. But - I want
you
>all to start thinking of a new way to look at spam filtering. I have
>some concepts that I'm testing that seem to be working well and if
>widely di
22 matches
Mail list logo
