procmail vs. SA (was: Re: Rule to filter for letter-number combinations?)

Toen wij Kai Schaetzl kietelden, kwam er dit uit:

> If you just want to get rid of spam from one day to the other
> and maybe for thousands of clients the former method is far more
> effective.  

And that was not the issue, but OK:

With a limited set of procmail rules you achieve the same 
success-rate as with an SA-setup. The procmail-approach 
requires far less resources, so will scale much better.

--

-- 
Grtz, Ruud

Re: Rule to filter for letter-number combinations?

Toen wij Kai Schaetzl kietelden, kwam er dit uit:

> About two years ago I had about the same FP/FN
> rates you mention by just rejecting all HTML messages and using about
> 100 - 150 "buzz" words. 

Fighting spam by spending too much time on even only the structure 
of the body of the message, let alone the contents of the message, 
is a sure way to lose.

Spammers are criminal human beings. They are stealing your resources 
too. Block them wherever you can, block their ISPs for as long as is 
necessary, on the most outer areas of your networks, with the proper 
error-messages like: we block spammers.

--

-- 
Grtz, Ruud

Re: Re: (address cycling) CLEANTO anyone?

On Sun, 30 May 2004 the voices made Don Hammond write:

DH> On 30 May, Professional Software Engineering wrote:

DH> | That will change over time.  I'm seeing a *LOT* of hits on things which are
DH> | not even addresses -- the spammers are harvesting messageids because they
DH> | generally appear like addresses: (something) <at> (host.domain.tld)
DH>
DH> I'm not seeing that.

 How about spam where the message-id's domain is the domain of your e-mail
address, seen any of those?

 I've set things up so that I'm using mid.svanstrom.com (127.0.0.1) in the
message-id, that way they 1) can't send e-mails to my message-ids, and 2) those
that use  <at> svanstrom.com in the message-id will simply help me automatically
train my bayesian filter...

 A few honey traps used to automatically train your filters will do wonders for
making sure that your bayesian filters will catch any new forms of spam.

--

-- 
  .-------------------------------------------------------------------.
  | Per scientiam ad libertatem! (Through knowledge towards freedom!) |
  `-------------------------------------------------------------------´
                   << ©1998-2004 tony <at> svanstrom.com >>

Re: procmail vs. SA (was: Re: Rule to filter for letter-number combinations?)

> Toen wij Kai Schaetzl kietelden, kwam er dit uit:
Whaaaaa!  That's funny! Completely brightened up my day!

--

-- 
Kind regards
Hans du Plooy
Newington Consulting Services
hansdp at newingtoncs dot co dot za

INBOX LIMIT

I have been using IMAP and if my mail box gets too full procmail will 
not write to that mail box.  Is there a way of increasing the size of 
the mail box?  Presently the mail boxes are under /var/spool/mail and I 
was thinking of moving them to ~USER/mail directory.  I saw some posts 
about MAX_INBOX_SIZE but either it is not valid any more or I am not 
implementing it correctly.  I am using RH ES 3 with Postfix.

TIA

David Urban

_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail <at> lists.RWTH-Aachen.DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

Re: INBOX LIMIT

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 16:22:52 -0500, David Urban, P.E.
<durban <at> huffcut.com> wrote:
> I have been using IMAP and if my mail box gets too full procmail will
> not write to that mail box.

This is not a promail issue, it is a issue with your MTA setting a mxa
mailbox size.  You will need to post on a list devoted to your MTA.

for example, the posfix default is

mailbox_size_limit = 51200000

which is about 50MB (48.8MB or 50,000K)

Re: INBOX LIMIT

David Urban wrote:

> I have been using IMAP and if my mail box gets too full procmail will
> not write to that mail box.  Is there a way of increasing the size of
> the mail box?  Presently the mail boxes are under /var/spool/mail and I
> was thinking of moving them to ~USER/mail directory.  I saw some posts
> about MAX_INBOX_SIZE but either it is not valid any more or I am not
> implementing it correctly.  I am using RH ES 3 with Postfix.

I think your major difficulty there will be in getting your system's 
imapd to let your IMAP client see a folder that isn't in the usual 
place.  Will the imapd follow a symlink?  Will the IMAP client follow it?

Create Mailboxes/Filter by subject

Hello, 

I am using the BTS from Debian and need to filter the packages 
in seperatly mailboxes by the name of the package.

This can be done by the Subjectline:

Subject: Debian Bugs information: Bug list for package a2ps
						       ^^^^
But I do not know how to filter the last word and if the mailbox
"=BTS/<package>/" does not exist how to create it automaticly.

OK, a bad hack woulb be to make a Very Big INCLUDERC file with 
all the package names I use... But with more then 1000 Packages ?

  ____ ( hack ) ______________
 /
|  :0
|  * ^Subject:.*(a2ps$)
|  BTS/a2ps/
 \____________________________

Greetings
Michelle

--

-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/ 
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917                  ICQ #328449886
                   50, rue de Soultz         MSM LinuxMichi
0033/3/88452356    67100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)

Re: INBOX LIMIT

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 18:41:17 -0500, David W. Tamkin <dattier <at> panix.com> wrote:
> David Urban wrote:

> > I have been using IMAP and if my mail box gets too full procmail will
> > not write to that mail box.  Is there a way of increasing the size of
> > the mail box?  Presently the mail boxes are under /var/spool/mail and I
> > was thinking of moving them to ~USER/mail directory.  I saw some posts
> > about MAX_INBOX_SIZE but either it is not valid any more or I am not
> > implementing it correctly.  I am using RH ES 3 with Postfix.
> 
> I think your major difficulty there will be in getting your system's
> imapd to let your IMAP client see a folder that isn't in the usual
> place.  Will the imapd follow a symlink?  Will the IMAP client follow it?

What are you talking about?  Why would this be an issue?

I've been using procmail with IMAP for several years (as I'm sure have
many others on this list), there is no problem here.

Re: Create Mailboxes/Filter by subject

On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 01:55:01AM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello, 
> 
> I am using the BTS from Debian and need to filter the packages 
> in seperatly mailboxes by the name of the package.
> 
> This can be done by the Subjectline:
> 
> Subject: Debian Bugs information: Bug list for package a2ps
> 						       ^^^^
> But I do not know how to filter the last word and if the mailbox
> "=BTS/<package>/" does not exist how to create it automaticly.

If the subject lines are always the same (e.g., "package foo" at the
end), you can start w/ this and see if it helps:

<snip>
SP=' 	'

:0
* $ ^Subject:.*package \/[^$SP]+$
{
  CHECK=`test -d $MATCH || mkdir -p $MATCH`

  :0
  $MATCH
}
</snip>

It won't check to see if the file already exists (as a file), but you