Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-10 Thread stan
On Sun, Feb 10, 2002 at 12:35:50PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.09.1556 +0100]: > > > i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone > > > cares to take over... > > > > I'm sorry, I don't undersyand. What's an ITP? Take over

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-10 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.09.1556 +0100]: > > i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone > > cares to take over... > > I'm sorry, I don't undersyand. What's an ITP? Take over what? Intent To Package. i am in the process of packaging spambouncer for

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-09 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Stan" == Stan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Stan> Do you have any insight on that? The last update (and the last message on the mailing list) was on 22 Aug 2001. I think the author is swamped with RL stuff (spambouncer updates have been more and more infrequent). However, sinc

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-09 Thread Wendell Cochran
> > > > On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >. . . I'm pretty agressive in comunicating to people that I desire to receive mail from how to send "proper" email (eg not hTML etc.) > > If you have boilerplate -- stock instructions for a general case -- can > > yo

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-09 Thread stan
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 07:55:09PM +0100, martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.07.1652 +0100]: > > If not, any sugestions as to an alternate? > > i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone > cares to take over... I'm sorry, I don't und

Re: SpamAssassin rules problems (was Re: SpamBouncer)

2002-02-09 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> It only seems to catch about 60% of the spam that gets past my other >> filters. (ordb, osirusoft, blarsbl, valid rDNS of relay, valid domain >> in envelope from) (These catch about 90% of the spam, and an occasional >> valid email.) > >T

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread stan
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:26:51AM -0800, Wendell Cochran wrote: > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 07:02:04 -0500 > From: stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: > > >> . . . Mostly SpamBouncer is a spam blocker. . . . but it's hard > >> to get it to block

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.07.1652 +0100]: > If not, any sugestions as to an alternate? i have the ITP. but i won't get to it before next weekend. if someone cares to take over... -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread martin f krafft
also sprach dman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002.02.08.0320 +0100]: > | Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spammer forged > | in the headers, hopfully it's dead and won't be revived. If you want to > | bounce spam, do it in the SMTP session you're receiving the message in. > > Oh

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread Wendell Cochran
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 07:02:04 -0500 From: stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: >> . . . Mostly SpamBouncer is a spam blocker. . . . but it's hard >> to get it to block all spam without also blocking a lot of legit stuff. >I've been usnig it for

Re: SpamAssassin rules problems (was Re: SpamBouncer)

2002-02-08 Thread dman
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:48:55AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote: | In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | [spamassassin] | >| The default rule scoring seems pretty far off to me though. | >Can you expand on this? | | (These comments are based on the few dozen mainly spam messages

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread stan
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 09:37:31AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote: > >>"Blars" == Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Blars> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: > >>> Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spamboun

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread stan
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 08:12:13AM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote: > begin stan quotation: > > > I've been usnig it for 5+ years, and I really don't have that problem. > > Do you have proper procmail recipies for all you mailing lists? > > Not all of them, intentionally,because some lists (such as

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread Craig Dickson
begin stan quotation: > I've been usnig it for 5+ years, and I really don't have that problem. > Do you have proper procmail recipies for all you mailing lists? Not all of them, intentionally,because some lists (such as debian-user) receive spam, and I want that filtered out. > What sorst of m

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread Manoj Srivastava
>>"Blars" == Blars Blarson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Blars> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: >>> Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? >> dunno It is, intermittently. I use

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread stan
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 07:47:30PM -0800, Craig Dickson wrote: > begin Blars Blarson quotation: > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: > > >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? > >

Re: SpamAssassin rules problems (was Re: SpamBouncer)

2002-02-08 Thread stan
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 12:48:55AM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > [spamassassin] > >| The default rule scoring seems pretty far off to me though. > >Can you expand on this? > > (These comments are based on the few dozen mainly spam messages

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-08 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >However, I do beleive that if a site is allowing spam to be relayed, it should >be made well aware of how unpopulat that is. Yes, but I didn't think that was what spambouncer did. Does it only send messages back to valid relays that aren'

SpamAssassin rules problems (was Re: SpamBouncer)

2002-02-08 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [spamassassin] >| The default rule scoring seems pretty far off to me though. >Can you expand on this? (These comments are based on the few dozen mainly spam messages I've fed to "spamassassin -t", and some reading of the spamassassin mailin

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-07 Thread Craig Dickson
begin Blars Blarson quotation: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: > >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? > >dunno > > Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spam

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-07 Thread stan
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 09:20:35PM -0500, dman wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:57:02PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote: > | In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > | >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: > | >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is bei

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-07 Thread dman
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 05:57:02PM -0800, Blars Blarson wrote: | In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: | >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: | >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? | >dunno | | Me neither. Since what it does i

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-07 Thread Blars Blarson
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: >| Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? >dunno Me neither. Since what it does is bombard the victim the spammer forged in the headers, hopfully it's dead

Re: SpamBouncer

2002-02-07 Thread dman
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 10:52:03AM -0500, stan wrote: | Anyone know if SpamBouncer www.spambouncer.org is being mainatined? dunno | If not, any sugestions as to an alternate? http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/config_docs/exim_spamassassin.html -D -- Misfortune pursues the sinner, but prosperity is