Trackback and comment spam can hammer a blog server and they are a common reason why bloggers disable such features. Of course, today, spam is not limited to email. System administrators are having to spend more time on the problem and they need more servers and bandwidth to deal with the increasing flow of spam. A lot of spam makes its way past the filters.
#Spam hammer vs spamassassin software#
Individual users might not be seeing the increase because spam-blocking software mitigates the problem to a degree.
2788 viruses and other malware (most caught by ClamAV). 32402 messages rejected due to SpamAssassin score of 10 or greater. 31935 messages rejected due to invalid recipient. 224722 connections rejected by IP address hits on black lists. 282414 connections rejected due to bad SMTP HELO syntax. Here's the breakdown on how we reject messages: 49194 messages accepted (I think this is actually a little high due to a configuration problem with our Zimbra server.). 829,890 SMTP connections made to our two gateway mail servers. These numbers represent a one-week snapshot (last Monday 2/26 to Sunday 3/4.) Here are the amazing stats that Bob shared with me. The bottom line, according to Bob Amen, Director of Systems Engineering at O'Reilly, nearly 95% of ALL incoming messages are spam. This is, of course, before the message is delivered to an O'Reilly user, who may apply additional spam filters in their email program. I'd like to see how we compare to other organizations.Īll of our incoming email goes through one of two gateways, which route mail to servers that decide to accept or reject the message. Let's first try to quantify the problem using O'Reilly's servers as an example. Was the situation as bad as I thought it might be? In short, the answer is yes, which only makes me wonder why more people aren't talking about it. When I learned how much spam was hitting our servers at O'Reilly, I decided to ask several long-time Internet luminaries these questions. * 1.Another War We're Not Winning: Us vs SpamĪre we losing the war on spam? Is the war on spam a war we can win? Is there any reason for hope? * -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * 1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl. * 1.9 URIBL_ABUSE_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the ABUSE SURBL * 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_ABUSE_SURBL,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=4.5 required=2.0 tests=RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET, Results via command line: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 () on myhost 
SPF_HELO_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE, Results via spamd: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 () on myhost How can I temporarily enable debug for spamd (Ubuntu 16.4, not using amavis)
What should I look for in the configuration which might cause this?
The results are entirely different for the same message (see below). My SpamAssassin daemon is not flagging as much spam as I would like (but it is flagging some), so I took a sample message which had not been flagged, and ran it thru SpamAssassin at the command line.
0 kommentar(er)
