On Mon, 16 Nov 2015, Jon Gerdes wrote:
> From: Jon Gerdes <gerdesj@???>
> To: "exim-users@???" <exim-users@???>
> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 00:26:22
> Subject: Re: [exim] Snowshoe spam rejection
> References: <56466FCD.20305@???>
>
> On Fri, 2015-11-13 at 16:18 -0700, Phillip Carroll wrote:
> > No question here. Just some information someone might be able to
> > use in their spam-fighting arsenal:
>
> Phillip
>
> Thanks for the detailed notes and insights - I'll be doing some
> investigation.
...
Possibly worth pointing out that there's common ground between
anti-virus and anti-spam software. Esepecially if you're using the
ClamAV virus checker:
http://www.clamav.net/
The variety of extra ClamAV signatures at:
http://sanesecurity.com/
include anti-spam, anti-phishing, etc signatures.
I found the above extra signatures were very useful and got rid of
a lot of stuff before even running messages through SpamAssassin.
This was quite efficient computationally, at the expense of the
extra memory used by ClamAV to store the "virus" signatures.
I've been out of the mail administrator role for quite some time
now. So I can't say whether or not these extra ClamAV signatures
will help with Snowshoe spam rejection.
--
Dennis Davis <dennisdavis@???>
