RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Chris Santerre
Title: RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation > > Yea...those are really good.  I didn't mention them as they > are enabled > by default in the latest SA versions.  At least, they are if > the network > tests in general are enabled. > URIBL isn't on by default. Ju

Re: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Jerry Gaiser
On Wednesday 08 February 2006 07:47 am, Chris Santerre wrote: > > Don't forget to use URIBL and SURBL Joey. They will stop a ton of spam. Indeed they do, but.. If you are one of those poor souls who are still using dialup AND you have to restart your system while offline, spamassassin will not s

Re: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Matt Kettler
Joey wrote: > Hello everyone, > > As I'm sure you are aware the spam these days seems to be getting worse. > In an attempt to be more aggressive we started using RulesDuJour. > What I would like to know is which rules are you using without too much > headache so that we can implement them into ou

RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Bowie Bailey
Loren Wilton wrote: > > These are the ones that I use. I haven't had any problems with > > them. > > > > SARE_EVILNUMBERS0 > > SARE_GENLSUBJ0 > > SARE_HTML0 > > SARE_HEADER0 > > SARE_OBFU0 > > SARE_URI0 > > I would add that most people could probably run the "1" versions of > the above "0" rule

Re: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Loren Wilton
> These are the ones that I use. I haven't had any problems with them. > > SARE_EVILNUMBERS0 > SARE_GENLSUBJ0 > SARE_HTML0 > SARE_HEADER0 > SARE_OBFU0 > SARE_URI0 I would add that most people could probably run the "1" versions of the above "0" rule files *in addition to the "0" version* with abs

Re: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Loren Wilton
> I am, and have been for a while, using SARE_REDIRECT_POST300 SARE_HTML > SARE_BAYES_POISON_NXM TRIPWIRE EVILNUMBERS SARE_RANDOM SARE_WHITELIST > SARE_OBFU SARE_STOCKS SARE_SPOOF to good effect (though someone will > probably tell me that at least one of those is no longer advisable). Nope, all s

RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Bowie Bailey
Chris Santerre wrote: > From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Joey wrote: > > > > > > As I'm sure you are aware the spam these days seems to be getting > > > worse. In an attempt to be more aggressive we started using > > > RulesDuJour. What I would like to know is which rules are you

RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Chris Santerre
Title: RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation > -Original Message- > From: Bowie Bailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 10:09 AM > To: SpamAssassin > Subject: RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation > > > Joey wrote: > > > > As I

RE: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Bowie Bailey
Joey wrote: > > As I'm sure you are aware the spam these days seems to be getting > worse. In an attempt to be more aggressive we started using > RulesDuJour. What I would like to know is which rules are you using > without too much headache so that we can implement them into our > configuration.

Re: RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Craig McLean
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Joey wrote: > Hello everyone, > > As I'm sure you are aware the spam these days seems to be getting worse. > In an attempt to be more aggressive we started using RulesDuJour. > What I would like to know is which rules are you using without too much >

RulesDuJour Recommendation

2006-02-08 Thread Joey
Hello everyone, As I'm sure you are aware the spam these days seems to be getting worse. In an attempt to be more aggressive we started using RulesDuJour. What I would like to know is which rules are you using without too much headache so that we can implement them into our configuration. I didn'