Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3442 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] Spam..
- From: Gideon Hallett <diogenes@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:46:16 +0000
- Message-id: <T57d1cc4e04ac1785c314f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Friday 14 December 2001 02:55, naurgrim wrote:
> On Thursday 13 December 2001 19:35, Doug McGarrett wrote:
> > Why don't you just filter him out? That's easy and gets him off your
> > back altogether. Now, if someone could tell me how to filter mail "from"
> > asdfklu with subject inmbles; I would love to know how. Oh, it has to
> > work in Lotus Notes. That's what we're using at work. These are all
> > porno guys trying to sell their wares. I'm not in IT, so I can't do
> > anything at the source, I'm just a poor dumb user (with no understanding
> > of Lotus) trying to get rid of the junk. (I must have 30 "rules" by now
> > to get rid of the spammers.)
>
> Sorry Doug -
>
> I don't know Notes.
>
> However, if it can filter on body text, how's about dumping everything that
> contains:
>
> to be removed
> to be permanently removed
> to get removed
> S.1618
> S. 1618
>
> That should get at least 60% of it. <g>
Has anyone else tried Spamassassin (http://spamassassin.taint.org/) ?
It's a set of configurable Perl stuff that sifts through your incoming mail
spool, runs a set of pattern-matching tests on it, and flags the spam (it
adds X-Spam-Flag headers, modifies the subject and adds a spam warning in the
body).
I download mail straight from my ISP via POP, through a Kmail filter that
pattern-matches the regexp . in the headers, pipes it through spamassassin
('spamassassin -p') - note, uncheck the 'if match hit, stop processing here!'
bit!
>From there, it goes to a second filter that looks for spamassassin-generated
flags, and diverts such into a spam folder. Of course, you could equally well
shred those mails unread; I'm still tuning mine, and don't want to shred
accidental false positives.
You can edit spamassassin's tolerance for potential false positives, and
exempt addresses from checking by editing /$HOME/.spamassassin.prefs.
A properly-tuned spamassassin can apparently identify 99.9% of spam on sight.
The only downside is that it does slow down mail reception a bit, due to
checking Vipul's Razor (http://razor.sourceforge.net/) for each message; but
you can turn that off, too.
(It's very cool, I have to say; and thanks to my friend Colm for helping me
work it out.)
For me, spam *is* a thing of the past.
Gideon.
> On Thursday 13 December 2001 19:35, Doug McGarrett wrote:
> > Why don't you just filter him out? That's easy and gets him off your
> > back altogether. Now, if someone could tell me how to filter mail "from"
> > asdfklu with subject inmbles; I would love to know how. Oh, it has to
> > work in Lotus Notes. That's what we're using at work. These are all
> > porno guys trying to sell their wares. I'm not in IT, so I can't do
> > anything at the source, I'm just a poor dumb user (with no understanding
> > of Lotus) trying to get rid of the junk. (I must have 30 "rules" by now
> > to get rid of the spammers.)
>
> Sorry Doug -
>
> I don't know Notes.
>
> However, if it can filter on body text, how's about dumping everything that
> contains:
>
> to be removed
> to be permanently removed
> to get removed
> S.1618
> S. 1618
>
> That should get at least 60% of it. <g>
Has anyone else tried Spamassassin (http://spamassassin.taint.org/) ?
It's a set of configurable Perl stuff that sifts through your incoming mail
spool, runs a set of pattern-matching tests on it, and flags the spam (it
adds X-Spam-Flag headers, modifies the subject and adds a spam warning in the
body).
I download mail straight from my ISP via POP, through a Kmail filter that
pattern-matches the regexp . in the headers, pipes it through spamassassin
('spamassassin -p') - note, uncheck the 'if match hit, stop processing here!'
bit!
>From there, it goes to a second filter that looks for spamassassin-generated
flags, and diverts such into a spam folder. Of course, you could equally well
shred those mails unread; I'm still tuning mine, and don't want to shred
accidental false positives.
You can edit spamassassin's tolerance for potential false positives, and
exempt addresses from checking by editing /$HOME/.spamassassin.prefs.
A properly-tuned spamassassin can apparently identify 99.9% of spam on sight.
The only downside is that it does slow down mail reception a bit, due to
checking Vipul's Razor (http://razor.sourceforge.net/) for each message; but
you can turn that off, too.
(It's very cool, I have to say; and thanks to my friend Colm for helping me
work it out.)
For me, spam *is* a thing of the past.
Gideon.
| < Previous | Next > |