You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by LuKreme <kr...@kreme.com> on 2004/08/08 06:26:09 UTC
Largest Spam?
On 07 Aug 2004, at 20:28, <jy...@ms1.hinet.net> wrote:
> Return-Path: <jy...@ms1.hinet.net>
> X-Original-To: kremels@kreme.com
> X-Greylist: delayed 1262 seconds by postgrey-1.14 at akane.covisp.net;
> Sat, 07 Aug 2004 20:28:00 MDT
> Received: from oppishell.com (web01.oppishell.de [82.211.31.251])
> by mail.covisp.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2857118AD6E
> for <kr...@kreme.com>; Sat, 7 Aug 2004 20:28:00 -0600 (MDT)
> Received: from 218-171-140-43.dynamic.hinet.net ([218.171.140.43]
> helo=linux-ag6y5fzs2)
> by oppishell.com with smtp (Exim 4.30)
> id 1Btd2v-0003oQ-Mu; Sun, 08 Aug 2004 04:04:26 +0200
> From: <jy...@ms1.hinet.net>
> To: <_...@_._>
> Subject:lgjtln ¸gÅç¤À¨É¢w°e©¯ºÖ»P°·±dµ¹¦Ñª¨¬O³Ì¨Îªº¤÷¿Ë¸`§ª« dzyspp
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: qghcpirxdonvfodyp
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="big5"
> Message-Id: <20...@mail.covisp.net>
> Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 20:28:00 -0600 (MDT)
> X-Covisp: 64.140.43.68
> X-Received: ms1.hinet.net mismatch
> X-Date-Munge: SUCCESS
>
> klpdbhiucrnjglbug
>
> <html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml"
> xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
> xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"
> xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel"
> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
>
> <head>
> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Big5">
> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document>
> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 9">
> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 9">
> <link rel=File-List href="./¹ùºÖ¤¤%20(21)¥~.files/filelist.xml">
> <title>±H¥óªÌ: <237159@cpc</title>
> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
> <o:DocumentProperties>
> <o:Author>user</o:Author>
> <o:Template>Normal</o:Template>
> <o:LastAuthor>077488_¦ó¥É³·</o:LastAuthor>
> <o:Revision>5</o:Revision>
> <o:TotalTime>188</o:TotalTime>
> <o:Created>2004-07-25T17:33:00Z</o:Created>
> <o:LastSaved>2004-08-02T09:58:00Z</o:LastSaved>
> <o:Pages>9</o:Pages>
> <o:Words>2141</o:Words>
> <o:Characters>12209</o:Characters>
> <o:Lines>101</o:Lines>
> <o:Paragraphs>24</o:Paragraphs>
> <o:CharactersWithSpaces>14993</o:CharactersWithSpaces>
> <o:Version>9.3821</o:Version>
> </o:DocumentProperties>
> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
And 280K of total spam size.
Of course, SA didn't touch this because of the size.
Should I increase the size that SA checks? Or assume this is a one
timer?
--
and I swear it happened just like this: / a sigh, a cry, a hungry kiss
/ the Gates of Love they budged an inch / I can't say much has happened
since / but CLOSING TIME
Re: Largest Spam?
Posted by Dimitrios <se...@altered.com>.
On Sat, 7 Aug 2004 22:26:09 -0600 "LuKreme" <kr...@kreme.com> wrote:
> And 280K of total spam size.
> Of course, SA didn't touch this because of the size.
> Should I increase the size that SA checks? Or assume this is a one
> timer?
i think most people have a limit of 256k to 512k so you could
safely increase your limit size to 512k.
Re: Largest Spam?
Posted by LuKreme <kr...@kreme.com>.
On 09 Aug 2004, at 10:57, Kris Deugau wrote:
> I would bet that the spam included attached images, rather than loading
Oddly, no. It was 250K of Japanese (Chinese? Something) html code.
There was one image, but it wasn't especially large
--
If we get through this alive I'll meet you next week same place same
time
Re: Largest Spam?
Posted by Kris Deugau <kd...@vianet.ca>.
LuKreme wrote:
[snip spam headers]
> And 280K of total spam size.
>
> Of course, SA didn't touch this because of the size.
>
> Should I increase the size that SA checks? Or assume this is a one
> timer?
I would ignore it. I'm not sure where the "don't scan >250K" default
came from, but the processing load gets MUCH higher for larger messages.
I would bet that the spam included attached images, rather than loading
them from a remote webserver. I've seen *maybe* two such messages in
three years or so across three different systems.
If anything, I would *lower* the maximum message size to ~150K or so;
most legit mail of any kind that does not include attached images will
be <100K, and just about ALL mail with attached images will be over
150K.
-kgd
--
Get your mouse off of there! You don't know where that email has been!