Search Results

Search found 1348 results on 54 pages for 'spam blocker'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 10/54 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • What Kind of Spam is This? Testing Blog Comment Limits

    - by Yar
    I received this comment on one of my blogs today (on blogger.com): Easily I agree but I about the post should acquire more info then it has. It's the third in a series. Before there was: I will not acquiesce in on it. I over precise post. Expressly the title attracted me to be familiar with the sound story. and before that Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now keep it up! It is obviously computer-generated (well, not this last one). The comments are from Anonymous, so they're not trying to legitimate a user on Blogger. Is this a spam attack? What might its goal be? Or are they just testing my blog to see if I reject or not? Does this kind of "attack" have a name?

    Read the article

  • How to send emails without getting into Spam Act trouble?

    - by Jason
    Lets say I have a database of 60,000 emails. I would like to send them an email notifying them of a new related service (similar to what they've signed up) which adds value to what they already signed up to. I know most of them would welcome it but they did not opt-in for this new related service. I don't want to send out the email invite only to find out I got into some Spam Act trouble. What is a friendly way to reach these targetted audience?

    Read the article

  • How do you make sure email you send programmatically is not automatically marked as spam?

    - by Leon Bambrick
    This is a tricky one - and I've always relied on techniques such as permission-based emails (i.e. only sending to people you have permission to send to) and not using blatantly spamish terminology. Of late, some of the emails I send out programmatically have started being shuffled into people's spam folder automatically - and I'm wondering what i can do about it. This is despite the fact that these particular emails are not ones that humans would mark as spam (specifically, they are emails that contain license keys that people have paid good money for, so I don't think they're going to consider them spam) I figure this is a big topic in which I am essentially an ignorant simpleton.

    Read the article

  • Cisco Spam Blocker, Iron Port, Lotus Domino, Integration Help

    - by NickToyota
    Hi serverfault universe, I work for a medium sized (roughly 200 user) company. We are attempting to intagrate our new Cisco Spam Video Blocker (ironport) device into our network so that it acts as an incoming filter then passes it off to our Lotus domino mail server. And also vise versa. The way our network is setup currently has an mx record pointing to our Domino mail SMTP incoming server which is currently setup to be an inbound gateway and filter (using symantec domino mail software). We want to replace the inbound gateway with the ironport. Our company has also invested in a pool of external IP addresses which I believe has been currently assigned to our web, email, servers. What would the proper course of action be to successfully integrate the device be? Mx record change? Replace the domino gateway completely with the ironport? We attempted to set the ironport device to the external IP of what our mx record is pointing to without much success. Any help on proper setup would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Cisco Spam Blocker, Iron Port, Lotus Domino, Integration Help

    - by NickToyota
    Hi serverfault universe, I work for a medium sized (roughly 200 user) company. We are attempting to intagrate our new Cisco Spam Video Blocker (ironport) device into our network so that it acts as an incoming filter then passes it off to our Lotus domino mail server. And also vise versa. The way our network is setup currently has an mx record pointing to our Domino mail SMTP incoming server which is currently setup to be an inbound gateway and filter (using symantec domino mail software). We want to replace the inbound gateway with the ironport. Our company has also invested in a pool of external IP addresses which I believe has been currently assigned to our web, email, servers. What would the proper course of action be to successfully integrate the device be? Mx record change? Replace the domino gateway completely with the ironport? We attempted to set the ironport device to the external IP of what our mx record is pointing to without much success. Any help on proper setup would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Extreme headache from ASSP Extreme Ban

    - by Chase Florell
    I've got a local user on my server that as of today cannot send email from any of their devices. Only Webmail (which doesn't touch any of their devices) works. Here are the various email failures I'm receiving in the logs. Dec-04-12 19:52:47 75966-05166 [SpoofedSender] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring:20] -- No Spoofing Allowed -- [Test]; Dec-04-12 19:52:47 75966-05166 [Extreme] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [spam found] -- score for 111.111.111.111 is 1980, surpassing extreme level of 500 -- [Test] -> spam/Test__1.eml; Dec-04-12 19:52:48 75968-05169 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring:10] -- IP in HELO does not match connection: '[192.168.0.10]' -- [Re Demo Feedbacks for End of November Sales]; Dec-04-12 19:52:48 75968-05169 [SpoofedSender] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring:20] -- No Spoofing Allowed -- [Re Demo Feedbacks for End of November Sales]; Dec-04-12 19:52:48 75968-05169 [Extreme] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [spam found] -- score for 111.111.111.111 is 2020, surpassing extreme level of 500 -- [Re Demo Feedbacks for End of November Sales] ->spam/Re_Demo_Feedbacks_for_End_of_N__2.eml; Dec-04-12 19:52:57 75977-05179 [SpoofedSender] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring:20] -- No Spoofing Allowed -- [test]; Dec-04-12 19:52:57 75977-05179 [Extreme] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [spam found] -- score for 111.111.111.111 is 2040, surpassing extreme level of 500 -- [test] -> spam/test__3.eml; ……………. Dec-04-12 19:55:35 76135-05338 [SpoofedSender] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring:20] -- No Spoofing Allowed -- [test]; Dec-04-12 19:55:35 76135-05338 [MsgID] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [scoring] (Message-ID not valid: 'E8472A91545B44FBAE413F6D8760C7C3@bts'); Dec-04-12 19:55:35 76135-05338 [InvalidHELO] 111.111.111.111 <[email protected]> to: [email protected] [spam found] -- Invalid HELO: 'bts' -- [test] -> discarded/test__4.eml; note: 111.111.111.111 is a replacement for the users home IP address Here is the headers of one of the messages X-Assp-Score: 10 (HELO contains IP: '[192.168.0.10]') X-Assp-Score: 10 (IP in HELO does not match connection: '[192.168.0.10]') X-Assp-Score: 20 (No Spoofing Allowed) X-Assp-Score: 10 (bombSubjectRe: 'sale') X-Assp-Score: 20 (blacklisted HELO '[192.168.0.10]') X-Assp-Score: 45 (DNSBLcache: failed, 111.111.111.111 listed in safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net) X-Assp-DNSBLcache: failed, 174.0.35.31 listed in safe.dnsbl.sorbs.net X-Assp-Received-SPF: fail (cache) ip=174.0.35.31 [email protected] helo=[192.168.0.10] X-Assp-Score: 10 (SPF fail) X-Assp-Envelope-From: [email protected] X-Assp-Intended-For: [email protected] X-Assp-Version: 1.7.5.7(1.0.07) on ASSP.nospam X-Assp-ID: ASSP.nospam (77953-07232) X-Assp-Spam: YES X-Assp-Original-Subject: Re: Demo Feedbacks for End of November Sales X-Spam-Status:yes X-Assp-Spam-Reason: MessageScore (125) over limit (50) X-Assp-Message-Totalscore: 125 Received: from [192.168.0.10] ([111.111.111.111] helo=[192.168.0.10]) with IPv4:25 by ASSP.nospam; 4 Dec 2012 20:25:52 -0700 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-40FE7453-4BE7-4AD6-B297-FB81DAA554EC Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Demo Feedbacks for End of November Sales References: <003c01cdd22e$eafbc6f0$c0f354d0$@com> From: Some User <[email protected]> In-Reply-To: <003c01cdd22e$eafbc6f0$c0f354d0$@com> Message-Id: <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 19:32:28 -0700 To: External User <[email protected]> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10A523) Why is it that a local sender has been banned on our local server, and how can I fix this?

    Read the article

  • Spam in Whois: How is it done and how do I protect my domain?

    - by user2964971
    Yes, there are answered questions regarding spam in Whois. But still unclear: How do they do it? How should I respond? What precautions can I take? For example: Whois for google.com [...] Server Name: GOOGLE.COM.ZOMBIED.AND.HACKED.BY.WWW.WEB-HACK.COM IP Address: 217.107.217.167 Registrar: DOMAINCONTEXT, INC. Whois Server: whois.domaincontext.com Referral URL: http://www.domaincontext.com Server Name: GOOGLE.COM.ZZZZZ.GET.LAID.AT.WWW.SWINGINGCOMMUNITY.COM IP Address: 69.41.185.195 Registrar: TUCOWS DOMAINS INC. Whois Server: whois.tucows.com Referral URL: http://domainhelp.opensrs.net Server Name: GOOGLE.COM.ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.GET.ONE.MILLION.DOLLARS.AT.WWW.UNIMUNDI.COM IP Address: 209.126.190.70 Registrar: PDR LTD. D/B/A PUBLICDOMAINREGISTRY.COM Whois Server: whois.PublicDomainRegistry.com Referral URL: http://www.PublicDomainRegistry.com Server Name: GOOGLE.COM.ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.HAVENDATA.COM IP Address: 50.23.75.44 Registrar: PDR LTD. D/B/A PUBLICDOMAINREGISTRY.COM Whois Server: whois.PublicDomainRegistry.com Referral URL: http://www.PublicDomainRegistry.com Server Name: GOOGLE.COMMAS2CHAPTERS.COM IP Address: 216.239.32.21 Registrar: CRAZY DOMAINS FZ-LLC Whois Server: whois.crazydomains.com Referral URL: http://www.crazydomains.com [...] >>> Last update of whois database: Thu, 05 Jun 2014 02:10:51 UTC <<< [...] >>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2014-06-04T19:04:53-0700 <<< [...]

    Read the article

  • Why is my Drupal Registration email considered spam by gmail? (headers included)

    - by Jasper
    I just created a Drupal website on a uni.cc subdomain that is brand-new also (it has barely had the 24 hours to propagate). However, when signing up for a test account, the confirmation email was marked as spam by gmail. Below are the headers of the email, which may provide some clues. Delivered-To: *my_email*@gmail.com Received: by 10.213.20.84 with SMTP id e20cs81420ebb; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.115.65.19 with SMTP id s19mr3930949wak.203.1271689651710; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from bat.unixbsd.info (bat.unixbsd.info [208.87.242.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 12si14637941iwn.9.2010.04.19.08.07.31; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:07:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of [email protected] designates 208.87.242.79 as permitted sender) client-ip=208.87.242.79; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of [email protected] designates 208.87.242.79 as permitted sender) [email protected] Received: from nobody by bat.unixbsd.info with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <[email protected]>) id 1O3sZP-0004mH-Ra for *my_email*@gmail.com; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:07:32 -0700 To: *my_email*@gmail.com Subject: Account details for Test at YuGiOh Rebirth MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Mailer: Drupal Errors-To: info -A T- yugiohrebirth.uni.cc From: info -A T- yugiohrebirth.uni.cc Message-Id: <[email protected]> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 08:07:31 -0700 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - bat.unixbsd.info X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - gmail.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [99 500] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bat.unixbsd.info X-Source: X-Source-Args: /usr/local/apache/bin/httpd -DSSL X-Source-Dir: gmh.ugtech.net:/public_html/YuGiOhRebirth

    Read the article

  • Why are emails sent from my applications being marked as spam?

    - by Brian
    Hi. I have 2 web apps running on the same server. The first is www.nimikri.com and the other is www.hourjar.com. Both apps share the same IP address (75.127.100.175). My server is through a shared hosting company. I've been testing my apps, and at first all my emails were being delivered to me just fine. Then a few days ago every email from both apps got dumped into my spam box (in gmail and google apps). So far the apps have just been sending emails to me and nobody else, so I know people aren't manually flagging them as spam. I did a reverse DNS lookup for my IP and the results I got were these: 100.127.75.in-addr.arpa NS DNS2.GNAX.NET. 100.127.75.in-addr.arpa NS DNS1.GNAX.NET. Should the reverse DNS lookup point to nimikri.com and hourjar.com, or are they set up fine the way they are? I noticed in the email header these 2 lines: Received: from nimikri.nimikri.com From: Hour Jar <[email protected]> Would the different domain names be causing gmail to think this is spam? Here is the header from one of the emails. Please let me know if any of this looks like a red flag for spam. Thanks. Delivered-To: [email protected] Received: by 10.231.157.85 with SMTP id a21cs54749ibx; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:03:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.151.130.18 with SMTP id h18mr3056714ybn.186.1272214992196; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: from nimikri.nimikri.com ([75.127.100.175]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 28si4358025gxk.44.2010.04.25.10.03.11; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 10:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 75.127.100.175 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) client-ip=75.127.100.175; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 75.127.100.175 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of [email protected]) [email protected] Received: from nimikri.nimikri.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by nimikri.nimikri.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o3PH3A7a029986 for <[email protected]>; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:03:11 -0500 Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 12:03:10 -0500 From: Hour Jar <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Message-ID: <[email protected]> Subject: [email protected] has invited you to New Event MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Read the article

  • Browser popup blocker blocking jasper reports generated from flex

    - by pietervn
    Hi all, I have a flex application that uses navigateToURL() to call a servlet. The servlet in turn generates a JasperReport and then uses exportReport() to show the report in a new browser tab. Now, my problem is this. I want to generate multiple reports at once, each opening in its own tab. It all works fine except that in Firefox the built in browser pop-up blocker sees every new tab that is opened after the first report tab as a pop-up. It blocks this and is giving me endless headaches. I also tried this in IE8, Safari, Chrome and Opera with no problems. Any help as to how I can get past the Firefox pop-up blocker would be much appreciated. Pieter

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2003 mail non-delivery (NDR), spam activity? events 7002 & 7004

    - by HighTechGeek
    Windows Server 2003 Small Business Server SP2 Exchange Version 6.5 (Build 7638.2: Service Pack 2) This network has been neglected and has been having email problems for years and was on many blacklists. I was called in after the server eventually crashed... I got the server back up and running, but email problems persist. Outgoing mail delivery is sporadic. Sometimes the mail goes through, sometimes a delayed delivery report is generated after a day or more, and sometimes it seems to go through, but the recipient never receives it. Not sure if spammers are successfully using the server as a relay (see event entries below after turning on maximum SMTP logging)... User PCs infected with viruses and server was blacklisted on many sites (I used mxtoolbox.com) I have cleaned all the PCs and changed all passwords (including administrator) I have requested removal from all of the blacklists - most have removed the listing, some take more time. I have setup rDNS pointer records with the ISP (Comcast) - that was one reason for some of the blacklistings. I have tested that it's not an open relay using telnet as described here: www.amset.info/exchange/smtp-openrelay.asp I followed the advise of a Spamhaus & Microsoft article to enable maximum SMTP logging. http://www.spamhaus.org/faq/answers.lasso?section=isp%20spam%20issues#320 which directed me to Microsoft KB article 895853, specifically, the part 2/3 down titled: "If mail relay occurs from an account on an Exchange computer that is not configured as an open relay" . The Application Event Log is filling with this type of activity (Event ID 7002, 7002 & 3018 errors): Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeTransport Event Category: SMTP Protocol Event ID: 7004 Date: 1/18/2011 Time: 7:33:29 AM User: N/A Computer: SERVER Description: This is an SMTP protocol error log for virtual server ID 1, connection #621. The remote host "212.52.84.180", responded to the SMTP command "rcpt" with "550 #5.1.0 Address rejected [email protected] ". The full command sent was "RCPT TO: ". This will probably cause the connection to fail. and this: Event Type: Warning Event Source: MSExchangeTransport Event Category: SMTP Protocol Event ID: 7002 Date: 1/18/2011 Time: 7:33:29 AM User: N/A Computer: SERVER Description: This is an SMTP protocol warning log for virtual server ID 1, connection #620. The remote host "212.52.84.170", responded to the SMTP command "rcpt" with "452 Too many recipients received this hour ". The full command sent was "RCPT TO: ". This may cause the connection to fail. or a variant of: Event Type: Warning Event Source: MSExchangeTransport Event Category: SMTP Protocol Event ID: 7002 Date: 1/18/2011 Time: 8:39:21 AM User: N/A Computer: SERVER Description: This is an SMTP protocol warning log for virtual server ID 1, connection #661. The remote host "82.57.200.133", responded to the SMTP command "rcpt" with "421 Service not available - too busy ". The full command sent was "RCPT TO: ". This may cause the connection to fail. also Event Type: Error Event Source: MSExchangeTransport Event Category: NDR Event ID: 3018 Date: 1/18/2011 Time: 9:49:37 AM User: N/A Computer: SERVER Description: A non-delivery report with a status code of 5.4.0 was generated for recipient rfc822;[email protected] (Message-ID ). Causes: This message indicates a DNS problem or an IP address configuration problem Solution: Check the DNS using nslookup or dnsq. Verify the IP address is in IPv4 literal format. Data: 0000: ef 02 04 c0 ï..À Any guidance and/or suggestions and/or tests to perform would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • All my emails to Yahoo!, Hotmail and AOL are going to Spam, though I've implemented every validation

    - by Chetan
    Hi, I've implemented everything and checked everything (SPF, DomainKey, DKIM, reverse lookup), and only Gmail is allowing my emails to go to Inbox. Yahoo, Hotmail and AOL are all sending my messages to Spam. What am I doing wrong? Please help! Following are the headers of messages to Yahoo, Hotmail and AOL. I've changed names and domain names. The domain names I'm sending mail from are polluxapp.com and gemini.polluxapp.com. Yahoo: From Shift Licensing Tue Jan 26 21:55:14 2010 X-Apparently-To: [email protected] via 98.136.167.163; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:59:12 -0800 Return-Path: X-YahooFilteredBulk: 208.115.108.162 X-YMailISG: gPlFT1YWLDtTsHSCXAO2fxuGq5RdrsMxPffmkJFHiQyZW.2RGdDQ8OEpzWDYPS.MS_D5mvpu928sYN_86mQ2inD9zVLaVNyVVrmzIFCOHJO2gPwIG8c2L8WajG4ZRgoTwMFHkyEsefYtRLMg8AmHKnkS0PkPscwpVHtuUD91ghsTSqs4lxEMqhqw60US0cwMn_r_DrWNEUg_sESZsYeZpJcCCPL0wd6zcfKmtYaIkidsth3gWJPJgpwWtkgPvwsJUU_cmAQ8hAQ7RVM1usEs80PzihTLDR1yKc4RJCsesaf4NUO_yN1cPsbFyiaazKikC.eiQk4Z3VU.8O5Vd8i7mPNyOeAjyt7IgeA_ X-Originating-IP: [208.115.108.162] Authentication-Results: mta1035.mail.sk1.yahoo.com from=example.com; domainkeys=pass (ok); from=example.com; dkim=permerror (bad sig) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (EHLO gemini.example.com) (208.115.108.162) by mta1035.mail.sk1.yahoo.com with SMTP; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:59:12 -0800 Received: from gemini.example.com (gemini [127.0.0.1]) by gemini.example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3984E21A0167 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=example.com; h=to :subject:from:content-type:message-id:date; s=mail; bh=bRIHfxE3S e+YeCrIOqziZsiESJA=; b=J+D56Czff+6wGjQycLEvHyT32+06Nngf+6h7Ep6DL SmmJv3ihiAFJIJiPxiwLNpUsOSHhwJYjYQtynbBnag40A6EUBIsucDR+VoEYD+Cc 9L0dV3QD5D77VpG9PnRQDQa91R+NPIt5og9xbYfUWJ1b/jXkZopb0VTM+H9tandM 24= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=example.com; h=to:subject :from:content-type:message-id:date; q=dns; s=mail; b=pO5YvvjGTXs 3Qa83Ibq9woLq5VSsxUD5uoSrjNrW9ICMmdWyJpb9oT5byFR9hMthomTmfGWkkh6 3VxtD0hb0HVonN+1iheqJ9QBBOctadLCAOPZV3mfA99XUu7Y0DR2qtkU/UkSe8In 5PENWFbwub88ZsRDiW3hCbNHl+UO8Jsc= Received: by gemini.example.com (Postfix, from userid 502) id 386DE21A0166; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) To: [email protected] Subject: Shift License For James Xavier From: "Shift Licensing" Content-type: text/html Message-Id: <[email protected] Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:55:14 -0800 (PST) Content-Length: 282` Hotmail: X-Message-Delivery: Vj0xLjE7dXM9MDtsPTA7YT0wO0Q9MjtTQ0w9Ng== X-Message-Status: n:0 X-SID-PRA: [email protected] X-AUTH-Result: NONE X-Message-Info: 6sSXyD95QpWzUBaRfzf3NMbaiSGCCYGXSczlzLw49r01I25elu3oYM0V2uNa8BV2O7DOiFEeewTBKMtN+PW+ig== Received: from gemini.example.com ([208.115.108.162]) by snt0-mc4-f7.Snt0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:18:53 -0800 Received: from gemini.example.com (gemini [127.0.0.1]) by gemini.example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9431321A0167 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:18:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gemini.example.com; h=to :subject:message-id:date:from; s=mail; bh=DLF0k+uELpY6If5o3SWlSj 7j0vw=; b=nAMpb47xTVh73y6a2rf6V1rtYHuufr46dtuwWtHyFC85QKfZJReJJL oFIPjgEC28/1wSdy8VbfLG1g64W1hvnJjet3rcyv3ANNYxnFaiH5yt3SDEiLxydS gjCmNcZXyiVsWtpv7atVRO/t/Own+oFB9zz/9mj43Bhm4bnZ2cTno= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gemini.example.com; h=to :subject:message-id:date:from; q=dns; s=mail; b=sFpNxlskyz4MYT38 BA/rQ6ZAcQjhy7STkLPckrCDVVZcE4/zukHyARq7guMtYCCEjXoIbVEtNikPC97F cGpJGGZrppTGjx62N0flxG8hvwejiJYnUJF1EIP4JckGWyEI+21vtWLLQ27eegtN fs9OkIQ2iUPC/4u8N1eqiff0VZU= Received: by gemini.example.com (Postfix, from userid 504) id 8ED7221A0166; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:18:53 -0800 (PST) To: [email protected] Subject: Testing this Message-Id: <[email protected] Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 13:18:53 -0800 (PST) From: [email protected] Return-Path: [email protected] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jan 2010 21:18:54.0039 (UTC) FILETIME=[29CEE670:01CA9ECD] AOL: X-AOL-UID: 3158.1902377530 X-AOL-DATE: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 5:07:23 PM Eastern Standard Time Return-Path: Received: from rly-mg06.mx.aol.com (rly-mg06.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.112]) by air-mg06.mail.aol.com (v126.13) with ESMTP id MAILINMG061-a1d4b5f6787a4; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:07:22 -0500 Received: from gemini.example.com (gemini.example.com [208.115.108.162]) by rly-mg06.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMG067-a1d4b5f6787a4; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 17:07:04 -0500 Received: from gemini.example.com (gemini [127.0.0.1]) by gemini.example.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B3821A0167 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:07:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=gemini.example.com; h=to :subject:message-id:date:from; s=mail; bh=RL0GLHd3dZ8IlIHoHIhA/U cLtUE=; b=BKg4p3qnaIdFRjAbvUa+Hwcyc6W91v4B4hN95dVymJrxyUBycWMUSC nzKmJ5QllhCYjwO+S7GrRdmlFpjBaK8kt2qmdCyC2UuiDF6xY6MXx/DBF56QpYtZ YDY4kXdiEMSbooH14B4CCPhaCTdC1wCtV0diat3EANCLxSDYAYq5k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gemini.example.com; h=to :subject:message-id:date:from; q=dns; s=mail; b=fDSjNpfWs7TfGXda uio8qbJIyD+UmPL+C0GM1VeeV8FADj6JiYIT1nT3iBwSHlrLFCJ1wxPbE4d9CGl8 gQkPIV6T4TL7ha052nur0EOWoBLoBAOmhTshF/gsIY+/KMibbIczuRyTgIGVV5Tw GZVGFddVFOYgee7SAu0KNFm7aIk= Received: by gemini.example.com (Postfix, from userid 504) id 2D5F521A0166; Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:07:03 -0800 (PST) To: [email protected] Subject: Testing Message-Id: <[email protected] Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:07:03 -0800 (PST) From: [email protected] X-AOL-IP: 208.115.108.162 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-d227.1 ; domain : gemini.example.com DKIM : pass X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Read the article

  • How do I avoid spam domains pointing to my site or IP

    - by Amol Ghotankar
    I came across an issue where I saw some xyz.com is pointing to mydomain.com. How do I avoid spam domains pointing to my domain? I read some posts about setting my virtual hosts and such, but nothing specific about how to avoid it in the first place. I searched on Google but most answers are for HTTP servers and there are no exact answers for Tomcat 7. I am not using Apache or IIS, but Tomcat directly.

    Read the article

  • SEO Providers - Freelancers, Professionals, Or Spam Artists?

    Again, many of these offers you'll receive look legit enough. They come complete from a real email address, with a realistic name, a real phone number, and all of the other necessary credentials to look respectable. Sure, they're real people on the other end of the line, but unlike most reputable freelancers in the SEO business, these folks have chosen to use dubious tactics (sending mass emails and spam) to thousands and thousands of people in the hopes that one or two follow up and fall into the trap.

    Read the article

  • 'Grum' Botnet Leads Spam Charge

    According to a report by messaging security specialist MessageLabs, spam now accounts for close to 90 percent of all e-mail traffic....Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Text after Control Sequence

    - by SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM
    I am trying to parse the output of a command that expects to be writing to the screen. It has data separated by move-to-origin control sequences (for the VT220, ESC[1;1H). I only need the last part (i.e. after the last move-to-origin). I have tried doing this multiple ways (primarily awk and sed), but the problem is always that parts of the control sequence have special meaning (to the program, not just to the shell), and I cannot quote them when I substitute tput's output. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Alternative to K9 spam handler?

    - by overtherainbow
    I've been using the free K9 spam handler for a couple of years now, but it hasn't been updated since 2004 and has a couple of bugs that bother me: The Find feature stops at the first e-mail found, and doesn't go further I'd like to copy the list of e-mails marked as either real or SPAM, but K9 only copies the first item in the clipboard For those of you who have researched desktop anti-SPAM handlers under Windows, what do you suggest as an alternative, either free or moderately priced?

    Read the article

  • Configure spamassassin to mark very similar messages as spam

    - by Caleb Gray
    Users on my server have been receiving spam, consistently, for some time now. I have most of spamassassin's plugins enabled, and I have made sure to enable verbose logging, where I can see that all of the plugins are working. Why is it, then, that my users are able to receive the same exact junk mail several times in a day without the message being flagged in some way? Here are the relevant headers of an email that I personally have received several copies of: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on sub.domain.tld X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_50,FSL_HELO_NON_FQDN_1, HELO_NO_DOMAIN,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 Have I accidentally missed the plugin that can see that I, and others, have received the same message multiple times in a short period of time?

    Read the article

  • How to deal with overly aggressive "Link Take Down Demands"?

    - by Eoin
    I've been receiving a large number of emails recently requesting I clean from link spam from my forum. Initially the emails were very polite and professional, and I was happy to remove the links. Recently the email have gotten very abrasive, here is a particularly rude example: From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Hi, This is the second time we are reaching out to you regarding your link to our site hxxp://www.company-two.com from hxxp://www.my-forum.com/some-topic-id. We really do need to remove this link. We have to report to Google any link we were unable to remove, and I wouldn't want to have to include your site in the list. Could you please remove our link from this page and any other page on your site? Thank You, Name Changed Behind the superficial pleasantries I feel there is some very real maliciousness. Note the email address, DMCA Violations, I don't see how the DMCA is involved here, except as a word which tends to strike fear in many people. Also relating to the email address, it doesn't match the company being linked to at all. How am I to trust they are truely operating on behalf of company-two when they don't even use one of it's email addresses. My email is hidden by privacypost. While a service with legitimate uses, I feel it's highly unprofessional for communications between to companies. The claim "This is the second time..." Every email I've received has started like this, but a check of my spam filters has never revealed a 1st mail. Initially I gave them the benefit of the doubt, by now though it's clear this is a cheap ploy to start me off on the defensive. And finally worst of all- the threats of reporting me to Google if I don't do everything they ask. I sent a polite reply asking for more information. I have no idea if the email address was even valid but I never received any response. Much later I got this followup mail From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Hi, This is the final time we are reaching out to you regarding your link to our site hxxp://www.company-two.com from hxxp://www.my-forum.com/some-topic-id. We will soon be reporting to Google any link we were unable to remove, and currently your site will have to be on the list. Could you please remove our link from this page and any other page on your site? I appreciate your urgent attention to this matter. Thank You, Name Changed This time the from address was more personal, though still not obviously connected to the spammed company. Lets be honest, I don't for one second believe that the companies were the victim of a 3rd party spammer as they claim. The links in questions were generated well over a year ago, and I firmly believe the companies were directly responsible for the spam links in question, a type of spam that has plagued my forum. Now they have the audacity to demand I spend my time cleaning up their mess, using threats to ensure they get their way. Have recent changes in Googles algorithms meant all the cash they spent spamming the web has now turned into a liability? If so I can see why these companies are all of a sudden running scared. Frankly, cleaning up my forum is a good things, but the threats they are using sickens me. So my question here is specifically about the threats: Are they vaild, and would such reports to Google destroy my page rankings? Is there a way I can report this abusive behaviour to Google?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >