search for: fights

I see no documents in the Dovecot documents wiki on how Dovecot features can be used in the fight against spam. One hit came up in a search, and it was about how to fight spam in the MoinMoin Wiki itself (e.g. TextCHAs and such). I already asked in another thread about removing message files at the search from a designated "learn-spam" folder. My next question would be how to

What is really puzzling me is that the ataraid device (/dev/ataraid/d0p1 mounted as /bigdisk) 2x 123GB IBM Deskstar's is formated as ext2...top and ps etc... show a fight between kjournald and kupdated and all searches for kjournald or kupdated fights suggest ext3 issues... :-) It's a RedHat 7.2, 2.4.7-10 custom kernal (I added in the Promise FastTrak support and HIGH mem support to break through the c800MB barrier to use the whole 1GB RAM). Creates the array fine... I get a problem as soon as I attempt to populate it... the box is a Atha...

From: Ajay <ajay at unisoftindia.net> > and hope that Redhat accepts the existance of this project and finds a > way to utilize it for good of both. You were doing fine up until this point. I think the speculation on Red Hat needs to stop, and I don't know why you had to interject this as well. From what I've seen, I don't think Red Hat is in any legal position to accept

On Fri, March 31, 2017 4:46 pm, Alice Wonder wrote: > On 03/31/2017 02:40 PM, Kenneth Porter wrote: >> On 3/31/2017 2:15 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >>> Well, it sounds like you are one of the companies with whose effort I >>> have >>> to fight constantly in my own effort to protect our users from spam... >> >> What makes Postfix superior in fighting

Getting Clueful: Five Things You Should Know About Fighting Spam The battle for your users? e-mail inboxes probably will never end, but it?s not a failure of technology. Experienced e-mail and system administrators share the key points they really, really wish you understood. http://www.cio.com/technology/infrastructure/security/spam/ five_things_about_fighting_spam.html?CID=28830 Thanks

In the up and coming wiki, don't forget to have an FAQ/Fight against FUD section. Looking at the web in January an upstream vendor employee said some things in his wiki. In Feb/March CentOS was discussed on the Fedora-list/Slashdot. - Common myths about the legality/ethicality of CentOS - CentOS providing value to Open Source as a whole - Projects emanating from CentOS like SMEServer

On 3/31/2017 2:15 PM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: > Well, it sounds like you are one of the companies with whose effort I have > to fight constantly in my own effort to protect our users from spam... What makes Postfix superior in fighting spam? How do I integrate MIMEDefang, SpamAssassin, and ClamAV with Postfix? Are there migration guides for moving one's Sendmail anti-spam and AV

Hello, in my log.nmb I regularly see these messages: process_local_master_announce: Server GUTENBERG at IP 192.168.35.90 is announcing itself as a local master browser for workgroup PIEZO and we think we are master. Forcing election. 1998/08/10 12:57:03 ***** Samba name server FAURE has stopped being a local master browser for workgroup PIEZO on subnet 192.168.32.1 ***** 1998/08/10

Well, we're still fighting it, and one thing I've discovered that I find extremely odd: the IPv6 lease file. On my C7 workstation, if I grep -c lease6, I see 5 leases; on a C6 server, I see 9, and in the last few days, I saw my box - they mass restarted the IPv6 clients everywhere yesterday, because a good number of systems had lost the client. Can someone explain why there would be more

Once upon a time, mark <m.roth at 5-cent.us> said: > This is that system with the missing management port, and I'm still > fighting it. Everything *looks* right: > > 3: enp6s0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast > state UP group default qlen 1000 > link/ether 00:25:90:0a:42:87 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff > inet 192.168.0.100/24 brd

Am 09.02.2015 um 22:29 schrieb Leander Sch?fer: > I'm currently busy with a substiution of my current mail server. I'm > currently using > > * Clam-SMTP and > * SpamAssassin > > to fight Spam. I wonder if it is worth implementing AmaViS with > SpamAssassin backend instead and also using AmaViS to speak to clamd > directly. But I more and more wonder wether

Breast cancer can be prevented? http://www.romaniancancerleague.org/newsletter/2004-04-27 Let's be together in the fight for life! - - - - For more information contact Romanian Cancer League: Address: 1-5 Calea Victoriei, sc.B, et.VI, ap.72, sector 3, Bucharest, Romania; Tel: +40.21-314.69.23; +40.21-314.69.33; Fax: +40.21-313.24.98; Email: office@romaniancancerleague.org Web:

Hi, folks. I'm senior online editor at CIO.com, and I'm working on an article for which I'd very much like your help. There's often a lack of communication between techies and top company management. Maybe they don't want to hear about problems; perhaps you give them technical details that are far more granular than they want to know. But dealing with spam is a topic

Hi, I'm currently busy with a substiution of my current mail server. I'm currently using * Clam-SMTP and * SpamAssassin to fight Spam. I wonder if it is worth implementing AmaViS with SpamAssassin backend instead and also using AmaViS to speak to clamd directly. But I more and more wonder wether AmaViS is even worth it?! It currently looks to me as if AmaViS is eating LOTS of

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1049 Summary: Variable delay in password logins to fight dictionary attacks Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 3.8.1p1 Platform: ix86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: sshd AssignedTo:

...has thousands of songs on request is threatened too. Any idea how we stand? Maarten ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Moffitt" <jack@icecast.org> To: <icecast@xiph.org> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:21 PM Subject: [icecast] [fred@vonlohmann.com: Re: pho: How Live365 fights back...] > This is a mail in response to streamripper being threatened by legal > action from Live365. The DMCA strikes again. > > jack. > > ----- Forwarded message from Fred von Lohmann <fred@vonlohmann.com> ----- > > Delivered-To: jack@localhost.cantcode.com > D...

On 12/02/2014 10:35 AM, Warren Young wrote: > We ship servers to remote sites, which are rarely staffed with techs familiar with Linux. We have them tell us the static IP configuration for the box before we ship it, then we set it up for them here and ship it out to the site, where they just plug it in, turn it on, and walk away. > > That?s the ideal, anyway. > > What often happens

On 15 March 2015 at 15:06, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > I used to use CSE:, but have now switched to using [CSE] because that seems to be the prevailing convention (and is somewhat more visually distinctive). I think it makes sense to codify that convention, but not to require them. Sometimes, there is nothing appropriate to use. Sometimes, the first or second word of the

This is that system with the missing management port, and I'm still fighting it. Everything *looks* right: 3: enp6s0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP group default qlen 1000 link/ether 00:25:90:0a:42:87 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff inet 192.168.0.100/24 brd 192.168.0.255 scope global enp6s0 ip route 192.168.0.0/24 dev enp6s0 proto kernel scope link

On 15 March 2015 at 16:31, Hal Finkel <hfinkel at anl.gov> wrote: > I don't want to code when to use them. But it makes sense to say, "If you want to include a title tag, do it like this...". I'm ok with that. So, do we have consensus? 1. Don't require, but recommend using [] for tags. 2. Don't specify attribution more than just "patch by Foo." and