Rosenbaum, Larry M. wrote:
From: Dennis Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
"Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I
first started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring
attempt), I tried that and it
John Rudd wrote:
> Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I first
> started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring attempt), I
> tried that and it didn't work.
I just tested this, and it works perfe
> From: Dennis Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ...
>
> > Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
> > "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I
> > first started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring
> > attempt), I tried that and it didn't w
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
> John Rudd wrote:
>
> > Question 1: Someone suggested that, for botnet_pass_domains, I not
> > re-invent the wheel. SA already has several whitelist options
> > (whitelist* and sare_whitelist* were specifically mentioned). They
> > suggested that I
John Rudd wrote the following on 11/30/2006 9:26 AM -0800:
Jonas Eckerman wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
"Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I first
started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring attempt
Jonas Eckerman wrote:
John Rudd wrote:
Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
"Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I first
started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring attempt), I
tried that and it didn't work.
That's odd. What erro
John Rudd wrote:
> Question 1: Someone suggested that, for botnet_pass_domains, I not
> re-invent the wheel. SA already has several whitelist options
> (whitelist* and sare_whitelist* were specifically mentioned). They
> suggested that I leverage them. My first (two part) question is:
Perso
John Rudd wrote:
> Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I first
> started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring attempt), I
> tried that and it didn't work.
That's odd. What errors did you get?
> Question 2: someone asked why my module is "Botnet" instead of
> "Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::Botnet". The answer is: when I first
> started this (and this is/was my first SA Plugin authoring
> attempt), I
> tried that and it didn't work. If someone wants to look at it, and
> figure out how to
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, John Rudd wrote:
> From: John Rudd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org,
> CommuniGate Pro Discussions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> MailScanner discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 04:06:55 -0800
>
John,
> a) do any of them have a small enough value that they wouldn't counter
> botnet's default score of 5? Meaning, if I "do nothing" with respect to
> those other whitelist mechanisms, they'll still "do the right thing" and
> let the botnet hosts through, right?
Not by default, although I se
Suggestion:
Rename your plugin to "AntiBotnet"
(or something like that)
Otherwise, I could see someone getting the "good guys" and "bad guys" mixed
up when reading or hearing about this!
Rob McEwen
Things I'm putting into the new Botnet version (which will be 0.5):
1) someone noticed that some MTA's (specifically CommuniGate Pro) don't
put the relay's RDNS into the Received headers, and thus Botnet 0.4
always triggered "NORDNS" when run on that MTA. In the new version, if
Botnet finds
13 matches
Mail list logo
