ion of SpamAssassin on the RH CD is ancient and full of bugs. You
should go to the SpamAssassin site and download an rpm of the latest
version.
Also, SpamAssassin is intended to work with your MTA. You are probably
using either sendmail or postfix if you installed RH 9. It will apply a
hea
I set up Spamassassin with sendmail and set a crontab entry to run fetchmail
every 5 minutes.
Then I set kmail to use whatever you named your machine as a pop3 server.
--
Michael S. Dunsavage
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/li
>I'm looking to use spamassasin with kmail if possible but I'm not
> sure where to start now. I've looked at online documentation
> and getting a little fustrated.
Spamassassin is best used with sendmail or qmail, which are mail
servers...not email clients.
check out the docs section of the web
Geoffrey Lane wrote:
I have installed spamassasin rpm off the redhat cd and looked at the
documentation at spamassasin's official site but I'm not getting it.
I'm looking to use spamassasin with kmail if possible but I'm not sure where
to start now. I've looked at online documentation and gettin
I have installed spamassasin rpm off the redhat cd and looked at the
documentation at spamassasin's official site but I'm not getting it.
I'm looking to use spamassasin with kmail if possible but I'm not sure where
to start now. I've looked at online documentation and getting a little
fustrated.
Brett Franck wrote:
Postfix 2.0 is the MTA. How can I allow a host of "63.111.163.37: 450
Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname" to be allowed to
transfer mail IN to my server but still use the reject_unknown_hostname
recipient restriction?
Looks like you should create an alternate sm
All,
I have my Postfix locked down pretty tight for
spam, and have come across a small problemI have a host that I want to
receive mail from but the "hostname is not found". Here's a piece of my
Postfix Main.cf(applicable)
smtpd_helo_required =
yesstrict_r
and closed?
Check the archives. It wasn't too long ago, and some very valid
pointers and tips were made.
Oh, and just something unrelated - I get so much junk mail from yahoo,
that I've simply blacklisted yahoo.com. I have no-one legitimate I
need to speak to at that spam haven. Maybe
pened, discussed and closed?
Check the archives. It wasn't too long ago, and some very valid pointers
and tips were made.
Oh, and just something unrelated - I get so much junk mail from yahoo,
that I've simply blacklisted yahoo.com. I have no-one legitimate I need
to speak to at that spam
> The
> > recent update to perl-suidperl-5.8.0-88.3 broke
> > > spam assasin on my RH8
> > > mail server. All mail that would normally be
> > > scanned by spam assassin was
> > > being rejected until I reverted to
> > > perl-suidperl-5.8.0-55.
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 09:34:03 +1000 (EST), Michael Mansour wrote
> --- Ben Holt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The
> recent update to perl-suidperl-5.8.0-88.3 broke
> > spam assasin on my RH8
> > mail server. All mail that would normally be
> > scanned by spam assass
Harish wrote:
Hi Ed,
Really appreciate your speedy resonse,pls find below the errors that I
got, this was after I had written the eniries in the rc.local file and
then rebooted the machine yestrerday night.Will try giving the full path
and let u know.
Thanks Once Again
Harish
Sep 23 23:54:49
, but rather the updated perl-suidperl rpm.
The updated rpm was definately my problem with spam assassin.
- Ben
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
--- Ben Holt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The
recent update to perl-suidperl-5.8.0-88.3 broke
> spam assasin on my RH8
> mail server. All mail that would normally be
> scanned by spam assassin was
> being rejected until I reverted to
> perl-suidperl-5.8.0-55.i386
The recent update to perl-suidperl-5.8.0-88.3 broke spam assasin on my RH8
mail server. All mail that would normally be scanned by spam assassin was
being rejected until I reverted to perl-suidperl-5.8.0-55.i386.rpm. Has
anyone else experienced a similar problem?
- Ben
--
redhat-list
Well modifying the first part would be nice!
__
* ! ^From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
{
* ^Subject: .*(MS|Microsoft|support|admin|Patch|Windows|Internet|Inet)
|formail -b -f -A"X-spam-check: bad
I noticed that these MS spam mailers do not know how to generate good
message id's... which is cool because the simple procmail recipe below got
rid of 99% of all these annoying mails! And most of them get caught by the
message id's. :-)
I know that the Subject line is a bit aggressiv
I noticed that these MS spam mailers do not know how to generate good
message id's... which is cool because the simple procmail recipe below got
rid of 99% of all these annoying mails! And most of them get caught by the
message id's. :-)
I know that the Subject line is a bit aggressiv
Dont be so rude. we linux users need to stick together, and if
friendships are formed over linux than it is a good thing!
So, reconsider your comment, please
Felix
Felix, Jason wasn't being rude at all. He is in fact correct. Meeting
linux friends is not what this list is about. I personally ge
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 21:55:11 -0230
Mike Pelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry - How do I configure the SpamAssassin rules to automatically
> delete mail identified as spam at the server level (e.g., send it to
> /dev/null or whatever).
>
First of all, its worth rememb
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Ravi Narwade wrote:
>
> hello everybody,
> I am getting spam bye different names how I can recover it, i am using
> redhat 7.3 and the sendmail version is 8.11.6.
> so please help me...
> and what spam command does?
This is rather vague. You should be mo
hello everybody,
I am getting spam bye different names how I can recover it, i am using
redhat 7.3 and the sendmail version is 8.11.6.
so please help me...
and what spam command does?
regards
--
ravi
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry - How do I configure the SpamAssassin rules to automatically
delete mail identified as spam at the server level (e.g., send it to
/dev/null or whatever).
Thanks!
Cheers,
Mike
Jason Dixon wrote:
|On Sun, 2003-08-24 at 20:18, Mike Pelley wrote
On Sun, 2003-08-24 at 20:18, Mike Pelley wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Folks - A friend of mine wants to set up SpamAssassin so that it will
> automatically delete anything categorized as spam at the server level
> (e.g., send it to /dev/null
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Folks - A friend of mine wants to set up SpamAssassin so that it will
automatically delete anything categorized as spam at the server level
(e.g., send it to /dev/null). I've mentioned several times that this
might not be a good idea as
By router I presume you mean SMTP mail server. If that's what you mean
then SpamAssassin is very good
www.spamassassin.org
Gordon
-Original Message-
From: Simon Tischer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 August 2003 09:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: spam filter
hi c
can a
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 12:29, Ed Wilts wrote:
>
> Please note that if you implement this, you have the potential to block
> a *lot* of legitimate e-mail. For example, this e-mail is coming to
> you from the redhat.com domain, yet it's got my From: address on it.
> It's quite possible for a legiti
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:41:15AM -0400, Gordon wrote:
> I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the sender
> uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or msn.com or
> whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't exist at all. Can
hi c
can anyone tell me a got spamfilter for linux, which can be installed on a
router?
--
---
be blessed
Simon
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Ed Wilts wrote:
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:41:15AM -0400, Gordon wrote:
I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the sender
uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or msn.com or
whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't exist at all. C
I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the sender
uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or msn.com or
whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't exist at all. Can
anyone tell me if it's possible (any prefereably how) to have s
On Monday 11 August 2003 10:41, Gordon wrote:
> I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the
> sender uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or
> msn.com or whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't
> exist at all. Can
Or with the use of Exim, which has is builtin to their configure file,
you just have to uncomment it !
Cheers,
Aly.
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 09:54, David Hart wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 11:41, Gordon wrote:
> > I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it thro
On Monday 11 August 2003 11:39, Gordon wrote:
> Ed Wilts wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:41:15AM -0400, Gordon wrote:
> >>I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the
> >> sender uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.co
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 11:41, Gordon wrote:
> I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the sender
> uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or msn.com or
> whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't exist at all. Can
>
MKlinke wrote:
On Monday 11 August 2003 10:41, Gordon wrote:
I've noticed that in most of the spam that makes it through the
sender uses a from address of something legitimate like aol.com or
msn.com or whatever. I already block email if the domain doesn't
exist at all. Can anyone tell
PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of James Gibbon
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: symantec spam message
"Rizzuto, Alan" wrote:
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> --_=_NextPart_001_01C3552A.C765E8B5
> Content-Type: text/plain;
>
just turned off the return message when
> it thinks it has spam problems - this has been a pain - I HATE SPAM!
Personally, I hate HTML mail - can't you send plain text to the
list instead?
> IS Administration
>
> Sturman Industries Inc.
>
> One Innova
Sorry for all of the issues – I just turned off the
return message when it thinks it has spam problems – this has been a pain
– I HATE SPAM!
Alan Rizzuto
IS Administration
Sturman Industries Inc.
One Innovation Way
Woodland Park, Co. 80863
(719) 686-6269
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
to see it. I just need to know where to start looking for
options to deal with this problem so
On Sun, 6 Jul 2003, Hal Burgiss wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 04:16:48PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> > and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> > do I start to figure out how t
On Sunday 06 July 2003 19:24, Ryan McDougall wrote in an attempt to be
witty and informative:
>
> The new mozilla mail app has a Statistical spam filter, supposed to
> work well. I havent used it though...
>
> Good luck,
> Ryan
It's actually very good, I used to use it
On Sun, 2003-07-06 at 15:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
> to see it. I just need to know where
> Hi,
> I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
> to see it. I just need to know where to start looking for
> options to deal with this
On Mon, 2003-07-07 at 06:04, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> start with procmail, and create a .procmailrc file. slowly,
> as you learn how the rules work, you'll get rid of more and
> more spam.
I've posted my /etc/procmailrc for example at:
http://thor.prohosting.com/~kilgoret/f
On Sun, Jul 06, 2003 at 04:16:48PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
> to see it. I just need to
On Sunday 06 July 2003 16:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in an
attempt to be witty and informative:
> Hi,
> I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
&g
On Sun, 6 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
> and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
> do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
> to see it. I just need to know where to start look
Hi,
I use fetchmail and pine for email. lately the volume
and offensiveness of spam has gotten out of hand. Where
do I start to figure out how to filter it so I don't have
to see it. I just need to know where to start looking for
options to deal with this problem so I can start learning
w
We get about 4,500 emails per week for and see five or six spams. We use
NO RBLs nor additional software.
I thought I would share our Postfix setup. YMMV. Since none of our staff
are tech-types, our approach is process oriented.
ftp://ftp.tqmcube.com/pub/postfix/postfix_spam_kit.tar
This is pret
On Sunday 06 July 2003 14:38, Cowles, Steve wrote:
>
> Your setup is very similar to what I have setup here. I too, frontend
> an exchange server with sendmail/spamass-milter/spamassassin. Your
> document is not a bad start for people wanting to frontend another
> mail server using SA. i.e. procm
> -Original Message-
> From: MKlinke
> Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2003 11:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Some results of the anti-spam testing
>
>
> On Sunday 06 July 2003 03:02, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> > At 7/2/2003 16:30 +0100, you wrote:
> > >Didn't mean
r, how about a quick Mini-HOWTO message
> on what you did? That way the rest of us can compare notes.
I wanted to set up a frontend spam filter for a MS Exchange box and put
together this test configuration. We can start with my notes, which
may be a little terse, but readable, I hope. Let me kno
At 7/2/2003 16:30 +0100, you wrote:
Didn't mean to send this to the RH list but what the heck! As I said to
my office mates, let me know if you have any questions!
Yes. Since you've come this far, how about a quick Mini-HOWTO message on
what you did? That way the rest of us can compare notes.
--
of view this testing has been a resounding success! In
> the past 30 hours the anti-spam mail server I set up has intercepted
> a little over 3300 spam messages that would have been normally
> delivered to our email accounts.
>
> About 500 of these have been passed along to our regul
urs the anti-spam mail server I set up has intercepted a
little over 3300 spam messages that would have been normally delivered
to our email accounts.
About 500 of these have been passed along to our regular mail server but
marked with the *****SPAM* Subject: and the X-Spam-Level Header
entr
On 24-Jun-2003/12:59 -0500, Ed Wilts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 10:36:22AM -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
>> >> That is unfortunate. I use filters and a homegrown challenge/response
>> >> system that operates like this:
>> >>
>> A combination of procmail, perl, and formail
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 10:36:22AM -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
> >> That is unfortunate. I use filters and a homegrown challenge/response
> >> system that operates like this:
> >>
> A combination of procmail, perl, and formail.
I've done some very generous snipping... Can you make your code p
On 24-Jun-2003/09:53 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>How do you know which character set the mail is using? Do you read the
>body of the email until you find some number of ascii characters that are
>outside of your acceptable ascii character range? Or is there a header
>entry that you look fo
Subject: Re: Great - just another spam
block...
Sent by:
r
es.
I cannot vouch for the systems run by Earthlink, or any of the specialty
anti-spam companies, but my own system has been setup with the limitations
of those systems in mind. I have learned from the mistakes and
misadventures of others. I can (and do) quickly respond to any unforeseen
mishaps.
I
e who sends me those stupid
>> >messages gets all further mail sent to /dev/null.
>>
>> That is unfortunate. I use filters and a homegrown challenge/response
>> system that operates like this:
>>
>> 1. Filter mail from mailing lists.
>> 2. Filter ma
/null.
>>
>> That is unfortunate. I use filters and a homegrown challenge/response
>> system that operates like this:
>>
>> 1. Filter mail from mailing lists.
>> 2. Filter mail from my scripts.
>> 3. Delete mail marked by my ISP as spam (scored 10/10).
unfortunate. I use filters and a homegrown challenge/response
> system that operates like this:
>
> 1. Filter mail from mailing lists.
> 2. Filter mail from my scripts.
> 3. Delete mail marked by my ISP as spam (scored 10/10).
> 4. Delete mail in character sets which I cannot
es like this:
1. Filter mail from mailing lists.
2. Filter mail from my scripts.
3. Delete mail marked by my ISP as spam (scored 10/10).
4. Delete mail in character sets which I cannot read.
5. Delete mail from unwanted senders (blacklist/killfile).
6. Filter mail from known senders (whitelist)
Gerry Doris wrote:
I'm not sure that works. I believe RBL may be a service that costs you
$$$ to use? What I actually have is
score RCVD_IN_SPAMCOP_NET 4
score RCVD_IN_RELAYS_ORDB_ORG 4
score RCVD_IN_SBL 4
score RCVD_IN_OSIRUSOFT_COM 4
score RCVD_IN_NJABL 4
On 18-Jun-2003/21:27 -0500, Bret Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 17:21, T. Ribbrock wrote:
>> Just got another one of those "SpamBlock: Please register to be
>> allowed to send mail to me" mails - this is just plain stupid! Running
>> list mail via such a mail address is ru
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Edward Dekkers wrote:
> Gerry Doris wrote:
>
> > I've cranked up the RBL's score to 4 from whatever the defaults are
> > and dropped my threshold to 4 from the default of 5. I'm also using
> > Bayes scoring which isn't appearing in your list.
>
> OK Gerry - I just added:
>
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 05:16:15PM -0700, Samuel Flory wrote:
> Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
>
> >
> >One could always get an email client with spam filtering capabilities
> >built in (like Mozilla)
> >
> It just takes a while teach mozilla that all of your mailing l
On Wed, Jun 18, 2003 at 09:03:19PM -0400, Matthew Galgoci wrote:
> I've removed [EMAIL PROTECTED] because I think using such a service on a
> list is about the most obnoxious thing I've seen in a long time.
>
> Please send reports to the redhat-list-admin email address, I only check
> the list ab
Gerry Doris wrote:
I've cranked up the RBL's score to 4 from whatever the defaults are
and dropped my threshold to 4 from the default of 5. I'm also using
Bayes scoring which isn't appearing in your list.
OK Gerry - I just added:
score RCVD_IN_RBL 4.00
the default appears to be 0.00
That ough
Samuel Flory wrote:
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
One could always get an email client with spam filtering capabilities
built in (like Mozilla)
It just takes a while teach mozilla that all of your mailing lists
aren't spam;-)
I've not had that problem actually, although there are tim
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Edward Dekkers wrote:
> Gerry Doris wrote:
>
> > What a hoot! Look what my SpamAssassin thought of this idiot's challenge
> > message...it decided it was SPAM and junked it!!!
>
> Kewl - now why didn't mine?
>
> No, hits=3.3
On Wed, 2003-06-18 at 20:07, Edward Dekkers wrote:
> Gerry Doris wrote:
>
> > What a hoot! Look what my SpamAssassin thought of this idiot's challenge
> > message...it decided it was SPAM and junked it!!!
>
> Kewl - now why didn't mine?
>
> No, hits=3.3
ly [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not want to receive
> any mail from this list, hence, I suggest he unsubscribes...
>
> I wonder, is there a way for the list software to recognize and
> unsubscribe such folks?
>
I was wondering what you were talking about until I dug into my spam
folder. F
Gerry Doris wrote:
What a hoot! Look what my SpamAssassin thought of this idiot's challenge
message...it decided it was SPAM and junked it!!!
Kewl - now why didn't mine?
No, hits=3.3 required=5.0
tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,EXCHANGE_SERVER,MAILTO_WITH_SUBJ,
MIME_NULL_BLOCK,
I've removed [EMAIL PROTECTED] because I think using such a service on a
list is about the most obnoxious thing I've seen in a long time.
Please send reports to the redhat-list-admin email address, I only check
the list about once a day.
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> Just got anot
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
One could always get an email client with spam filtering capabilities
built in (like Mozilla)
It just takes a while teach mozilla that all of your mailing lists
aren't spam;-)
--
There is no such thing as obsolete hardware.
Merely hardware that other people
ain stupid! Running
> >>list mail via such a mail address is rude at the least, IMO.
> >>
> >>Anyway, apparently [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not want to receive
> >>any mail from this list, hence, I suggest he unsubscribes...
What a hoot! Look what my SpamAssas
PROTECTED] does not want to receive
any mail from this list, hence, I suggest he unsubscribes...
in all fairness, i just tried to set up something like this through
earthlink (AKA mindspring) and was thoroughly frustrated with how
useless it was.
One could always get an email client with spam
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:42:08AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > On 00:21 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > | I wonder, is there a way for the list software to recognize and
> > | unsubscribe such folks?
> >
> > No, bec
On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock wrote:
>
> > Just got another one of those "SpamBlock: Please register to be
> > allowed to send mail to me" mails - this is just plain stupid! Running
> > list mail via such a mail address is rude at the least, IMO.
>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 08:42:08AM +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 00:21 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> | I wonder, is there a way for the list software to recognize and
> | unsubscribe such folks?
>
> No, because the report goes directly to the poster.
> The list
;From". double stupid.
while there's no doubt that we're going to be seeing more of
these "please register" messages, based on my experience, i'm
going to be at least a little understanding.
it's the symptom of people who are (like many of us) sick to
de
On 00:21 19 Jun 2003, T. Ribbrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Just got another one of those "SpamBlock: Please register to be
| allowed to send mail to me" mails - this is just plain stupid! Running
| list mail via such a mail address is rude at the least, IMO.
[...]
| I wonder, is there a way for
T. Ribbrock wrote:
Just got another one of those "SpamBlock: Please register to be
allowed to send mail to me" mails - this is just plain stupid! Running
list mail via such a mail address is rude at the least, IMO.
Anyway, apparently [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not want to receive
any mail from this lis
Just got another one of those "SpamBlock: Please register to be
allowed to send mail to me" mails - this is just plain stupid! Running
list mail via such a mail address is rude at the least, IMO.
Anyway, apparently [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not want to receive
any mail from this list, hence, I sugges
I agree,
smacks of 'Lets jump on the band wagon' approach!
Marty
- Original Message -
From: "alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "redhat list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "David" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 2:19 P
"solution" that does
not scale well, if at all.
At this point, I will be adding SpamArrest messages to my spam filters. If
someone is too clueless to set up a mail filter that does not require
human intervention for every sender, then they just won't get my messages.
Besides.
lines of this message,
i believe this message in itself could be considered spam.
i agree that spam is a problem,
and due to spammers some mail servers wont even accept mail
from my cable modem. It is necessary to route it through my isp.
my own personal solution to spam is to use spamassassin on
> We have Sendmail running on RH 7.3, forwarding mail to an Exchange
> server. Installed SpamAssassin and have not yet found *details* on how
> to successfully integrate it with Sendmail. Would like to configure
> SpamAssassin to add "*SPAM*" to the Subject line of
Mohammed Awad wrote:
Hi all, I need someone to tell me about some good reference to push
me into the field of programming of the Linux Network subsystem. I
need to write a code to implement some additional functionality for
the NAT protocol.
http://www.netfilter.org/
Specifically, you want to look
pamAssassin to add "*SPAM*" to the Subject line of each
> suspected email and still forward it the user's inbox on the Exchange
> server. Once there, setting rules to redirect the spam is not a
> problem.
>
> Can someone point me to more explicit documentatio
Hello,
We
have Sendmail running on RH 7.3, forwarding mail to an Exchange server.
Installed SpamAssassin and have not yet found *details* on how to successfully
integrate it with Sendmail. Would like to configure SpamAssassin
to add "*SPAM*" to the Subject line of each
Pauly wrote:
- I don't wanna use LD_LIBRARY_PATH, due to the known reasons.
What known reasons?
And even as I set LD_LIBRARY_PATH in /etc/profile, gnome isn't starting
correctly, cause it can't find the old gtk 2.0 libs then.
Then only set the variable for the program, when you run it. It
sh
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 10:05:15AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> . If
> your conserned about false positives then RBL is the wrong way to go!
I should have clarified my original statements. There are good RBLs and
there ar
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:02:19AM -0600, Jason Cordes wrote:
> > I'm using a rbl on my sendmail server here for my company but that has only
> > lightly cut down on the amount of spam some of my users get. Is spamassasin
> > onl
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:46:47AM -0600, Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 09:02:19AM -0600, Jason Cordes wrote:
> > I'm using a rbl on my sendmail server here for my company but that has only
> > lightly cut down on the amount of spam some of my users get. Is spamassa
False positives are my big problem right now. I have Norton Antivirus for
exchange on my exchange server and it includes a spam filter but it created
waaay too many false positives and blocked legitimate email.
I suppose I'll just tune my word lists and block whatever bypasses my RBL'
spamassassin is include with RH9. Although, probably not gui configurable
along with the redhat sendmail gui. But yes, blocking open relays only
helps a little. Spam still comes via legitamate gateways.
IMHO, MIMEDefang can block spam without the need for spamassassin - and it
would be at the
1 - 100 of 410 matches
Mail list logo
