richard at buzzhost
Oct 31, 2009, 7:08 AM
Post #5 of 5
(199 views)
Permalink
|
On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 08:05 -0500, Chris wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 12:53 +0000, richard[at]buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 07:29 -0500, Chris wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2009-10-31 at 07:46 +0000, richard[at]buzzhost.co.uk wrote:
> > > > http://pastebin.com/m53a550ce
> > > >
> > > > Somewhat unfortunately seen coming out of The Dana-Farber Cancer
> > > > Institute.
> > > >
> > > > Looking at it objectively there is little for a filter to go on other
> > > > than the words:
> > > >
> > > > username password followed by a webmail type email address
> > > >
> > > > in the body.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Short Circuit rule hit here due to ClamAv plug-in firing:
> > >
> > > -0.1 RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_NO RBL: HostKarma: relay in NO-BL (varies)
> > > [155.52.251.101 listed in
> > > hostkarma.junkemailfilter.com]
> > > 20 CLAMAV Clam AntiVirus detected a virus
> > >
> > > X-Spam-Virus: Yes (Sanesecurity.Spear.9873.UNOFFICIAL)
> > >
> > My clamav is on a milter ahead of SA, my thinking being I don't bother
> > scanning anything that has a virus - drop it with an SMTP 5xx. I had no
> > virus/attachment with this mail, hence why it scanned and scored low.
> > I'm not sure if this is the spammer dropping a cog and not attaching
> > anything.
> >
> Are you running the 'unofficial' sigs with clamav or just the official
> ones? As above, my clamav setup tagged this as a 'spear phishing'
> attempt with the unofficial sigs.
>
Vanilla, Chris - but not via Spamassassin. Upstream of it.
|
signature.asc
