.wmf vulnerability

[Kevin Miller]

Ken A wrote:
> Kevin,
> Thank you. I didn't realize the allow rules worked that way, though I
> should have! .. more coffee!
> Ken

You're welcome.  Truth be told, I didn't either, but I have a terciary
level mail gateway that MailWatch shows catching 76.3% high scoring
spam, and 14.3% spam.  I hardly ever see a legitimate message traverse
it so it's a great box to test things on!  Guess the spammers theory is
that the lowest level MX gateway is the least likely to be up to date,
but in my case it's the first one I do when I upgrade.  I can blow it up
all day long and nobody will notice! <g>  

I knew the allows were in there, but always took them for granted.  Nice
doing a science experiment every now and again to broaden my horizons...

...Kevin
-- 
Kevin Miller                Registered Linux User No: 307357
CBJ MIS Dept.               Network Systems Admin., Mail Admin.
155 South Seward Street     ph: (907) 586-0242
Juneau, Alaska 99801        fax: (907 586-4500

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the Wiki (http://wiki.mailscanner.info/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!