To the list moderator: How about banning Dave from the list? There was a similar case recently with the freeradius list and banning the offending person was quite a success.
Have you idiots ever thought of implementing some simple anti-spam measures? I have offered my services (free) many times, but thus far
have been ignored, so I can only assume that you lot are spam-supporters.
Am I right? As it happens, I am in the middle of upgrading a Penguin
box; all you have to do is say the word, and it'll run FreeBSD instead.
-- Dave
I think the objections are to his tone.
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 20:17 +0100, Andreas Schindler wrote:
To the list moderator: How about banning Dave from the list? There was
a similar case recently with the freeradius list and banning the
offending person was quite a success.
Silence the messenger? While Dave's frustration seemed to have gotten
the best of him, he does still have a very legitimate point. The Debian lists do a piss poor job of blocking very obvious spam. Piss poor job.
If your banning people for pointing out, for several years now, an
obvious problem, then ban me too.
-Jim P.
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 11:52 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:
I think the objections are to his tone.
Well there are those here who would find fierce objections to top
posting... ;-)
That aside, I do think it's time for pitchforks+torches wrt the spam emanating bendel.debian.org. Dave's tone is warranted for a problem
that has persisted, and continues to be nonchalantly addressed.
Yes, I know there are buttons to report spam that ends up in the d.o archives, but that is NOT a solution for spam that bendel.debian.org
sends to Dave, me, and everyone else.
-Jim P.
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 12:07 -0800, Tao, Tchie wrote:I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither do I got something from Dave.
Perhaps someday he might learn to express his frustrations in some
sort of constructive fashion rather than insulting folks and throwing
a childish tantrum?
And perhaps someday the spammers will learn to respect others... but I'm
not holding my breath.
How long should Dave wait out the problem before insulting folks? 1
month, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 25 years? At
what point should constructive feedback yield to insults, and at what
point should insults yield to violence?
If your answer to that last question is "never", then I suggest you
study some history. ;-)
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no idea
I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither do I
got something from Dave.
Alex - Debian Listmaster
Patch? I think you've identified the problem.
A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes made to spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of 2
for an email that:
1) contained a shortened URL
2) was From: a freemail address
3) fails SPF for outlook.it
4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock Spamassassin
rules.
Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score ofGetting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything.
5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0. Which one will "win"?
But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL checks
in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
Perhaps someday he might learn to express his frustrations in some
sort of constructive fashion rather than insulting folks and throwing
a childish tantrum?
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither
do I
got something from Dave.Â
Alex - Debian Listmaster
Patch?   I think you've identified the problem.
A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes
made to
spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of
2
for an email that:
1) contained a shortened URL
2) was From: a freemail address
3) fails SPF for outlook.it
4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock
Spamassassin
rules.
We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no
idea how much spam we catch.
Further, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score
of 5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0.  Which one will
"win"?
But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL
checks in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
Getting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything.Â
We would still call SA.Â
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 22:05 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Jim Popovitch wrote:
On Mon, 2018-12-03 at 21:38 +0100, Alexander Wirt wrote:
I never got any patch of you for our anti spam measures, neither
do I
got something from Dave.
Alex - Debian Listmaster
Patch? I think you've identified the problem.
A start would be to tighten or remove any out-of-the box changes
made to
spamassassin. Let's be clear, your current setup only set a score of
2
for an email that:
1) contained a shortened URL
2) was From: a freemail address
3) fails SPF for outlook.it
4) contains blacklisted received headers (ZEN, PBL, Barraacuda)
5) promotes Instagram to a technical laptop discussion list.
That email should have scored at least a 5 or 6 in stock
Spamassassin
rules.
We can give it a try, just for this list. But tbh, you have really no
idea how much spam we catch.
That's good, and Thank you for that.
it is used for several things, like a viruscanner, language specific spamassassin sets and some other things. Removing it wouldn't get you betterFurther, email headers show you have Amavis with a threshold score
of 5.3 and Spamassasin with a threshold of 4.0. Which one will
"win"?
But really, you would be better served by just enabling some RBL
checks in Spamassassin and getting rid of Amavis.
Getting rid of amavis wouldn't change anything.
We would still call SA.
Why involve Amavis then? If it's not being used, then it's just another potential point of failure in the mail process.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 296 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 34:27:41 |
| Calls: | 6,648 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,193 |
| Messages: | 5,328,826 |