On Fri, 23 May 2014 09:15:07 -0400
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 5/23/2014 3:02 AM, Joe wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:38:37 -0500
> > John Hasler wrote:
> >
> >> Joe writes:
> >>> But you normally only get one spam at a time from one ISP, which
> >>> suggests they do spot the problem themselves
On 5/23/2014 3:02 AM, Joe wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:38:37 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
Joe writes:
But you normally only get one spam at a time from one ISP, which
suggests they do spot the problem themselves fairly quickly...
It suggests that the spammers are quite sophisticated in their u
On Thu, 22 May 2014 18:38:37 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Joe writes:
> > But you normally only get one spam at a time from one ISP, which
> > suggests they do spot the problem themselves fairly quickly...
>
> It suggests that the spammers are quite sophisticated in their use of
> their bots.
The
On 5/22/2014 4:15 PM, Bob Holtzman wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 01:47:50PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:06 PM, basti wrote:
Actually I get some spam from "84.19.164.45"but this ip is not blocked
at the moment.
Forward the message including all headers to the ab
Joe writes:
> But you normally only get one spam at a time from one ISP, which
> suggests they do spot the problem themselves fairly quickly...
It suggests that the spammers are quite sophisticated in their use of
their bots.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
--
To UNSUBSCRIB
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:27:28 +0200
Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>
> I'm saying:
>
> Send an _e-mail_ to the abuse contact point for the IP address block
> owner.
>
> Don't simply blacklist. Well, feel free to add the IP address in
> question to a local blacklist, but if you can't be arsed to notify
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Bob Holtzman wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 01:47:50PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:06 PM, basti wrote:
>> > Actually I get some spam from "84.19.164.45"but this ip is not blocked
>> > at the moment.
>>
>>
>> Forward the message i
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 01:47:50PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:06 PM, basti wrote:
> > Actually I get some spam from "84.19.164.45"but this ip is not blocked
> > at the moment.
>
>
> Forward the message including all headers to the abuse contact for the
> IP addres
On 5/22/2014 6:16 AM, Henning Follmann wrote:
> I thought that this is handled via ACLs.
And not by Debian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537e0915.
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:06 PM, basti wrote:
> Actually I get some spam from "84.19.164.45"but this ip is not blocked
> at the moment.
Forward the message including all headers to the abuse contact for the
IP address.
You can look this up using whois.
whois 84.19.164.45 =>
...
% Abuse cont
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:44:49PM +0200, basti wrote:
> Hello,
> I use the spamhaus blacklist for exim (CHECK_RCPT_IP_DNSBLS).
>
> First of all what are the differences between CHECK_RCPT_IP_DNSBLS and
> CHECK_RCPT_DOMAIN_DNSBLS ??
>
> Make it sense to use both? if yes can I also use zen.spamhau
11 matches
Mail list logo