On 29-Nov-2009, at 04:59, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
> I'd assume that a big ISP using SA (and wants the best from SA install) would
> pay to use the better DNSBLs.
I've found pretty much the opposite; the larger the ISP, the worse job they do
filtering spam for their customers. The only exception i
On søn 29 nov 2009 12:59:32 CET, Jonas Eckerman wrote
I'd assume that a big ISP using SA (and wants the best from SA
install) would pay to use the better DNSBLs.
ask recipient if a isp does a well good job of stopping spam to ones
inbox, payed dnsbl or not :=)
shared rbl listes is silly, s
Martijn Grooten wrote:
- I'm happy to add any extensions as long as these are also free and
open source -- note that our 'target audience' includes big ISPs and
unfortunately for them things as Spamhaus's RBL aren't free;
This doesn't make any sense. You are comparing SA to commercial products
Alex wrote:
Hi,
- I'm happy to add any extensions as long as these are also free and
open source -- note that our 'target audience' includes big ISPs and
unfortunately for them things as Spamhaus's RBL aren't free;
Do the commercial vendors get to use publically-available DNSBLs like
zen?
Martijn Grooten wrote:
All,
a few months back, there was a discussion on this list about the
VBSpam comparative anti-spam tests[1], in which SpamAssassin performed
significantly worse than many commercial products. Now I run these
tests and I believe something was the matter with (the installati
Hi,
>> - I'm happy to add any extensions as long as these are also free and
>> open source -- note that our 'target audience' includes big ISPs and
>> unfortunately for them things as Spamhaus's RBL aren't free;
Do the commercial vendors get to use publically-available DNSBLs like
zen? If so, and
Martijn Grooten wrote:
- I'm happy to add any extensions as long as these are also free and
open source -- note that our 'target audience' includes big ISPs and
unfortunately for them things as Spamhaus's RBL aren't free;
I'm not in any way trying to jump on what you're trying to do as I
firm
Martijn,
I may be missing something here but I went to your website and
you use the terms "malware" and "spam" interchangeably.
Now, it may be true that these days in the commercial realm
that the antivirus vendors are all jumping into the anti-spam market
to enhance revenue, but in reality
All,
a few months back, there was a discussion on this list about the
VBSpam comparative anti-spam tests[1], in which SpamAssassin performed
significantly worse than many commercial products. Now I run these
tests and I believe something was the matter with (the installation
of) SA that made it pe
The last one is the lowest scoring here, look at the results:
For the first mail:
Content analysis details: (13.2 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
--
--
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO ma
http://hege.li/howto/spam/spamassassin.html
Remove everything from Botnet.cf RULES-section and set it up this way:
Does the above line mean to remove from the # THE RULES?
regards
On one server I manage, I found Botnet to be a tremendous help in
tagging spam, but does produce some FPs, almost entirely because of
misconfigured DNS. After notifying several mail/network admins of
their fubar DNS, I got tired of trying to clean up the Internet and
throttled Botnet back to 4.5 p
I have my trusted network setup correctly - but botnet fires on so many
domains, domains which would normally like to trust.
Yes its entirely possible its not set up right...but i followed the
instructions as best i could.
Bill Landry wrote:
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote the following on 4/9/20
Robert Fitzpatrick wrote the following on 4/9/2007 4:37 PM -0800:
> Bill Landry wrote:
>> Peter Russell wrote the following on 4/9/2007 3:41 PM -0800:
>>> We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and
>>> drives me nuts.
>>>
>> You must not have Botnet and/or your trusted_networks
Bill Landry wrote:
Peter Russell wrote the following on 4/9/2007 3:41 PM -0800:
We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and
drives me nuts.
You must not have Botnet and/or your trusted_networks setup correctly
then.
Bill
I am running Postfix+Amavisd-new+SA 3.1.7 gateways
Peter Russell wrote the following on 4/9/2007 3:41 PM -0800:
We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and drives
me nuts.
You must not have Botnet and/or your trusted_networks setup correctly then.
Bill
We dont use Botnet anymore, it fires on anything/everything and drives
me nuts.
Content analysis details: (7.5 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
--
--
1.5 FH_RELAY_NODNS We could no
At 01:53 PM 4/9/2007, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote:
Can anyone run any of these messages to see how your rules score them?
Mostly stock symbol spam. I've been improving our scoring with updates
today, but still not able to come up with any rules to cover these:
http://esmtp.webtent.net/mail1.txt
--- Robert Fitzpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can anyone run any of these messages to see how your rules score
> them?
> Mostly stock symbol spam. I've been improving our scoring with
> updates
> today, but still not able to come up with any rules to cover these:
>
> http://esmtp.webtent.n
Can anyone run any of these messages to see how your rules score them?
Mostly stock symbol spam. I've been improving our scoring with updates
today, but still not able to come up with any rules to cover these:
http://esmtp.webtent.net/mail1.txt
http://esmtp.webtent.net/mail2.txt
http://esmtp.webte
20 matches
Mail list logo
