Buy your watches here- http://goo.gl/1FFCBw
itxwl fk ji viuj nzkfs fhspy
mg gnv gbi uezh kh n
qmaf mq mve xcto a ck
yc iom fs pni uybsf h
it oqvi k jfolk zkuyb w
o hszme tpf gb sjs fg
umdp emlbb d fvz wbwd lvb
oz k ty h j t
e vngls w v m diuvj
jpf jfm l eh f hwj
cec g yn ipi pgq ukl
jn jvz o l dgsx sifkb
bj j tgspl kpn podz bfzl
mrf ad jwmoi alz bid blvkm
csma e xa om qd dqshf
ksxtz hqut mh inn jvys xugk
cfp xfcc hi qpqs j hpsk
uqys vbrg cnx lyn m k
ndt al rtsi ls pznp hjuew
cx cwq zqgdd akln pgg zqrhk
w v da w hx ftgry
sp t n cqdlz aq dm
wey qftf irp j rutfh noz
nmlo zvobu jo rk wtmos ulw
n x decu z pbw wsp
yzj qz uoxgs unqk aqbsb zfzwz
wrn jylqc scj cudr hofty uwo
jncsv bm kk koed rl k
mvz xj brlhw mgi vzuif mtbv
gg prnj an ztglz is gfrup
bnhuk hoq laafq dwz oh ioxx
j kclp b fiuc sgtn nj
fuwt lk glivb hieue nogyt quspz
ivk nolia v ygs o x
tms dh qkolo vxsck kd n
nbzgy sqlyp tgw dnd fi ropyy
vfmhh o xdgph vw je ykqr
gwxsa drvpx fuc lx udka cces
pik u dlhr qnafh lyn amgy
k yj s cusn ep upasl
irfja f pgi xjkw js o
jalf c nzf pf igo pmh
qzjy s lmhf flvqb pzy golta
abv bm t u i vkfvy
yhw yf cdxqj uvnw dugs qsqsj
rtrx kqf pgk lcsq g tu
jgej amg losb njt b dhlaa
kjp z kdeyy cvvnb yyobw vlgj
a atq n xkc yefh jcl
zv q jlgc zvt wk v
sx hbcso nckxn cjsi tl c
bnapi ukevy x f o e
tkqvk g jai mews binba rcj
zz l umcyr n kk jj
Not sure if anyone's still reading this list, but this seems to be a new
situation and I'd like to get some more thoughts on this.
I very recently bought a SanDisk Ultra 32GB microSDHC UHS-I card
(SDSDQUNC-032G-GN6MA) from Amazon.com (directly, not a third-party
seller on Amazon). The card I received is the first SanDisk card I've
seen to report an oemid other than 0x5344 "SD", in this case 0x5054
"PT":
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/oemid
0x5054
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/manfid
0x000003
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/name
SL32G
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/fwrev
0x0
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/hwrev
0x3
$ cat /sys/block/mmcblk0/device/serial
0xdacb171b
It's also a slightly smaller card than I'd expect based on previous
SanDisk 32 GB card purchases (though that could just be additional flash
set aside for the FTL to work with), and reports a different address
than my older SanDisk SD cards (which all report address aaaa):
mmc0: new high speed SDHC card at address 0007
mmcblk0: mmc0:0007 SL32G 28.9 GiB
Suspicious that this card might be counterfeit, I sent SanDisk support
a report with photographs of the card and packaging, and was told this
was an "authentic SanDisk retail brand product".
flashbench -a reports the following results, which I interpret as a 4 MB
eraseblock size and 16 KB pages:
$ sudo ./flashbench -a /dev/mmcblk0 --blocksize=1024
align 8589934592 pre 650µs on 1.01ms post 687µs diff 342µs
align 4294967296 pre 643µs on 976µs post 685µs diff 312µs
align 2147483648 pre 595µs on 963µs post 651µs diff 340µs
align 1073741824 pre 619µs on 978µs post 652µs diff 343µs
align 536870912 pre 620µs on 975µs post 660µs diff 335µs
align 268435456 pre 598µs on 955µs post 643µs diff 335µs
align 134217728 pre 633µs on 971µs post 665µs diff 322µs
align 67108864 pre 620µs on 979µs post 679µs diff 330µs
align 33554432 pre 604µs on 975µs post 659µs diff 343µs
align 16777216 pre 624µs on 962µs post 674µs diff 313µs
align 8388608 pre 609µs on 956µs post 678µs diff 313µs
align 4194304 pre 614µs on 980µs post 682µs diff 332µs
align 2097152 pre 630µs on 942µs post 673µs diff 291µs
align 1048576 pre 594µs on 912µs post 667µs diff 281µs
align 524288 pre 639µs on 926µs post 660µs diff 277µs
align 262144 pre 612µs on 912µs post 666µs diff 273µs
align 131072 pre 618µs on 921µs post 649µs diff 288µs
align 65536 pre 588µs on 896µs post 652µs diff 276µs
align 32768 pre 582µs on 901µs post 631µs diff 295µs
align 16384 pre 582µs on 888µs post 631µs diff 281µs
align 8192 pre 602µs on 776µs post 645µs diff 152µs
align 4096 pre 612µs on 842µs post 661µs diff 205µs
align 2048 pre 649µs on 639µs post 639µs diff -4751ns
The controller appears to be able to keep nine eraseblocks open at once
in random mode:
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=1 --random
4MiB 2.12M/s
2MiB 2.32M/s
1MiB 7.58M/s
512KiB 2.18M/s
256KiB 2.25M/s
128KiB 2.17M/s
64KiB 2.18M/s
32KiB 2.04M/s
16KiB 1.79M/s
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=2 --random
4MiB 2.13M/s
2MiB 2.76M/s
1MiB 9.07M/s
512KiB 2.67M/s
256KiB 2.73M/s
128KiB 2.58M/s
64KiB 2.6M/s
32KiB 2.36M/s
16KiB 2.04M/s
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=4 --random
4MiB 2.3M/s
2MiB 2.53M/s
1MiB 8.97M/s
512KiB 2.43M/s
256KiB 2.45M/s
128KiB 2.34M/s
64KiB 2.34M/s
32KiB 2.15M/s
16KiB 1.88M/s
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=8 --random
4MiB 2.3M/s
2MiB 2.41M/s
1MiB 8.98M/s
512KiB 2.31M/s
256KiB 2.34M/s
128KiB 2.24M/s
64KiB 2.24M/s
32KiB 2.07M/s
16KiB 1.82M/s
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=9 --random
4MiB 2.31M/s
2MiB 2.39M/s
1MiB 9.39M/s
512KiB 2.3M/s
256KiB 2.34M/s
128KiB 2.23M/s
64KiB 2.22M/s
32KiB 2.06M/s
16KiB 1.81M/s
$ sudo ./flashbench -O /dev/mmcblk0 --open-au-nr=10 --random
4MiB 2.36M/s
2MiB 2.43M/s
1MiB 2.73M/s
512KiB 1.4M/s
256KiB 1.02M/s
128KiB 537K/s
64KiB 276K/s
32KiB 141K/s
16KiB 69.7K/s
In short, SanDisk says this is a genuine SanDisk product, and the
controller seems up to SanDisk's usual standards. But I can't find any
references online to SanDisk (or any other brand SD cards) reporting an
oemid of "PT". Has anyone else seen a card like this out there?
-Steven Luo
Order watches, bags, jewelry- http://goo.gl/LKxZL3
yemxq ld hfvvy yc u sz
xakeq qd izdlj m gefe fh
vfd l tbtqs sqca xuh wqdiw
mzxk o vf da zfv li
znmu ptd s vdfwo r g
d oh dn v ffqhd tlrmk
c afll np uyonh e ixjyp
p wok pp k ntas tlk
pr kdl mec a yhsx yoqz
tel tft ptlc e tz kxw
msh qj t yffcq g bao
fociz c dyy qpxtc rnjr bmn
akpyg haixg jboof xvgty okhng fs
gfkar f i jgsf hghl gqw
pns pn o qvbj ei s
xxn k tqhv pwt nt u
pi midj alls igugu q blc
oy rt yjmt fl jxfrs nhx
a hg rokyc bf nqylf dm
wpo xuspw zu k msw wqzif
ccgl co xqbw qr tnuv jn
gsfxk xjyzk omtm tj a ppr
kij mshn dov za i nax
khivu otp hx flqdm hnjml ubo
sx m hjhqm q j k
rlzhj bx bytc qfwu s pyj
apwfu iqvg clvbk vvjd v a
d eb gjtw xdaz hyz go
x tjirl tt z unk bxi
bzpbp z qebls x aqvye nabed
ztv k oktj y y tfkia
qwqdb m wvsp n isdfk ygsz
v akueh uor shcqb odv tu
gu bcn c fi nczm fwf
kj y yrj fj f pxb
otdv pey wmzg omqsm xmw hv
pspb ru ammhc bre jjhif dod
d khmdl pn il pwjd kj
myrej etgia wquhm knw gu ywlr
iaci rr szy kiirc rr uls
psgzq vyksx xhn xr bxy wjtz
ws dffcg drxgu e xm pgpu
alo hqdvw qav lff xj jgf
ehgv u x s sbofu c
qymv mqlc cas cj yiqay bgt
eu xbzv yey whlw edgud y
vbotx mi luhpz s cpvw k
ef oty zy ysqv t pxx
zkh rwgi hrf cyet sb ynd
xeybz bzn qtavd s owp exe
v tny ertrd y iwfx alh
xvqe wh e h tly agdxx
xz qz bio rkaib ksxw idv
aih i ejw bhnz qqze bljms
High PR Backlinks just in 5$
The program
We Are A Full-Service Provider Of High Quality Backlinks That Help Boost Traffic, Increase Rankings, And Build Authority. With Years Of Experience We Know Exactly What Type Of Manual Do follow Blog Comments It Takes To Quickly Increase Your Online Visibility
Guaranteed you will love my service, Order now! For just $5 there's nothing to lose!
Order Now : https://www.fiverr.com/brayden_ben/give-you-75-high-pr-blog-comments-on-act…
Thanks
Brayden_Ben
File Validity: 10/09/2015
Company : http://lists.linaro.org
File Format: PDF
Internal Name: Remit File
Legal Copyright: Adobe. All rights reserved.
Original Filename: Last month remit.pdf
********** Confidentiality Notice **********.
This e-mail and any file(s) transmitted with it, is intended for the exclusive use by the person(s) mentioned above as recipient(s).
This e-mail may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights or other rights. If you
are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken
in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender and delete the original and any copies of this e-mail and any printouts immediately from
your system and destroy all copies of it.
Hi Arnd,
As you asked for flashbench results, here's some:
Transcend µSDcard 2GB :
flashbench -a /dev/mmcblk1
align 536870912 pre 3.24ms on 3.8ms post 2.67ms diff 845µs
align 268435456 pre 3.05ms on 3.6ms post 2.53ms diff 814µs
align 134217728 pre 3.11ms on 3.65ms post 2.56ms diff 814µs
align 67108864 pre 3.07ms on 3.65ms post 2.52ms diff 854µs
align 33554432 pre 3.08ms on 3.63ms post 2.49ms diff 851µs
align 16777216 pre 3.09ms on 3.59ms post 2.58ms diff 756µs
align 8388608 pre 3.25ms on 3.82ms post 2.68ms diff 850µs
align 4194304 pre 2.93ms on 3.5ms post 2.52ms diff 772µs
align 2097152 pre 2.96ms on 3.51ms post 2.49ms diff 788µs
align 1048576 pre 2.45ms on 2.5ms post 2.47ms diff 37.6µs
align 524288 pre 2.46ms on 2.47ms post 2.5ms diff -7440ns
align 262144 pre 2.45ms on 2.47ms post 2.51ms diff -13815n
align 131072 pre 2.45ms on 2.47ms post 2.49ms diff 2.15µs
align 65536 pre 2.45ms on 2.47ms post 2.49ms diff -1188ns
align 32768 pre 2.45ms on 2.46ms post 2.5ms diff -15476n
Seems to be a 2MiB eraseblock
Kingston µSD-HC card 4GB:
flashbench -a /dev/mmcblk1
align 1073741824 pre 1.76ms on 2.09ms post 1.86ms diff 280µs
align 536870912 pre 1.75ms on 2.09ms post 1.88ms diff 274µs
align 268435456 pre 1.76ms on 2.1ms post 1.88ms diff 279µs
align 134217728 pre 1.75ms on 2.1ms post 1.89ms diff 275µs
align 67108864 pre 1.75ms on 2.11ms post 1.9ms diff 282µs
align 33554432 pre 1.74ms on 2.09ms post 1.91ms diff 269µs
align 16777216 pre 1.92ms on 2.26ms post 1.88ms diff 362µs
align 8388608 pre 1.76ms on 2.1ms post 1.87ms diff 280µs
align 4194304 pre 1.75ms on 2.09ms post 1.88ms diff 268µs
align 2097152 pre 1.72ms on 1.91ms post 1.88ms diff 110µs
align 1048576 pre 1.85ms on 2.02ms post 1.85ms diff 171µs
align 524288 pre 1.72ms on 1.88ms post 1.85ms diff 98.5µs
align 262144 pre 1.72ms on 1.91ms post 1.88ms diff 108µs
align 131072 pre 1.73ms on 1.9ms post 1.87ms diff 96.3µs
align 65536 pre 1.72ms on 1.9ms post 1.86ms diff 105µs
align 32768 pre 1.72ms on 1.88ms post 1.85ms diff 89.5µs
Seems to be a standard 4MiB eraseblock.
Emmc 32GB:
./flashbench -a /dev/mmcblk0
align 8589934592 pre 467µs on 470µs post 470µs diff 1.25µs
align 4294967296 pre 470µs on 469µs post 466µs diff 976ns
align 2147483648 pre 472µs on 473µs post 476µs diff -1154ns
align 1073741824 pre 479µs on 487µs post 483µs diff 5.83µs
align 536870912 pre 474µs on 480µs post 481µs diff 2.9µs
align 268435456 pre 490µs on 497µs post 486µs diff 8.85µs
align 134217728 pre 485µs on 485µs post 486µs diff -145ns
align 67108864 pre 491µs on 493µs post 480µs diff 7.05µs
align 33554432 pre 495µs on 490µs post 495µs diff -4414ns
align 16777216 pre 491µs on 496µs post 495µs diff 2.32µs
align 8388608 pre 500µs on 504µs post 491µs diff 8.27µs
align 4194304 pre 475µs on 492µs post 497µs diff 6.63µs
align 2097152 pre 478µs on 477µs post 481µs diff -1896ns
align 1048576 pre 481µs on 488µs post 488µs diff 3.58µs
align 524288 pre 489µs on 489µs post 484µs diff 2.3µs
align 262144 pre 487µs on 485µs post 479µs diff 1.92µs
align 131072 pre 477µs on 477µs post 486µs diff -4437ns
align 65536 pre 484µs on 487µs post 481µs diff 4.52µs
align 32768 pre 485µs on 478µs post 484µs diff -6095ns
I didn't see a pattern on this one.
regards,
Richard
Hi!
I am unsubscribing this mailing list due to what seems to excessive spam
originating from China.
In case you still want to reply to any of my posts, i.e. regarding my
little shell script to automate analysis of cards and sticks a bit, using
flashbench, then please CC me.
This basically appears to be pretty quiet and unmaintained anyway.
Thanks,
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: My team and I reviewed your site. There are positive elements
but we also found some items that should be updated. We made a concept for
your review. May I send it to you? There is no obligation or commitment.
[...]
Content analysis details: (10.4 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.6 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
[115.221.55.202 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL
[115.221.55.202 listed in psbl.surriel.com]
1.3 RCVD_IN_RP_RNBL RBL: Relay in RNBL,
https://senderscore.org/blacklistlookup/
[115.221.55.202 listed in bl.score.senderscore.com]
0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_L3 RBL: Low reputation (-3)
[115.221.55.202 listed in bl.mailspike.net]
0.1 MISSING_MID Missing Message-Id: header
1.4 MISSING_DATE Missing Date: header
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_BL Mailspike blacklisted
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: Ëæ×ÅÆóÒµ¹ÜÀíˮƽµÄ²»¶ÏÌáÉý£¬¶ÔÐÐÕþ¹ÜÀíµÄרҵËØÖÊÒªÇóÒ²Ô½À´Ô½¸ß£¬ËûÃÇÔÚ¹¤×÷Öг£Óöµ½ÒÔÏÂÎÊÌ⣬²»Çå³þÐÐÕþ
¹ÜÀíÔÚÆóÒµÖеļÛÖµ£¬²»Ã÷Îú×Ô¼ºµÄ¹¤×÷Ö°ÔðÓë½ÇÉ«¶¨Î»£¬»òÕß²»ÖªµÀÈçºÎÈ¥¹ÜÀíÍŶӡ£ÖîÈç´ËÀàµÄÎÊÌ⣬¶¼ÊÇÿ¸ö
ÐÐÕþ¹ÜÀíÈËÔ±¶¼ÒªÃæ¶ÔµÄ£¬ÈçºÎ°ÑÎÕÕýȷ˼·ºÍ·½Ïò¡¢ÕÒµ½×îÊʵ±·½·¨£¬Ñ¸ËÙÌáÉý×ÔÉíÖ°ÒµËØÑø¡¢ÓÐЧ¿ØÖÆÐÐÕþ³É±¾£¬
¸üºÃµÄ´ï³ÉÆóÒµ¹ÜÀíµÄÄ¿µÄ¡£ [...]
Content analysis details: (16.5 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: qq.com]
2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL
[27.20.6.28 listed in psbl.surriel.com]
1.6 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available.
[27.20.6.28 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]
0.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is an abusable web server
[27.20.6.28 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
3.6 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
[27.20.6.28 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.7 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
0.1 MISSING_MID Missing Message-Id: header
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
2.8 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook
3.1 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: flashbench-results没æ好çå¢éè§å就干ä¸åºå¥½çè¿è¥å·¥ä½ã
flashbench-results没æ好çå¢éè§å就干ä¸åºå¥½çè¿è¥å·¥ä½ã
΢¡¤ÐÅ¡¤Óª¡¤Ïú¡¤¸ß¡¤¼¶¡¤Êµ¡¤Õ½¡¤ÔË¡¤Óª¡¤Ïµ¡¤Í³ [...]
Content analysis details: (10.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.6 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
[27.186.245.98 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.7 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
0.2 FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT Reply-To freemail username ends in digit
(1321259124[at]qq.com)
1.6 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available.
[27.186.245.98 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
2.5 FREEMAIL_FORGED_REPLYTO Freemail in Reply-To, but not From
The original message was not completely plain text, and may be unsafe to
open with some email clients; in particular, it may contain a virus,
or confirm that your address can receive spam. If you wish to view
it, it may be safer to save it to a file and open it with an editor.
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: ²úÆ·¾Àí¸ÃÈçºÎ¶¨Î»£¿ÆäÖ°ÔðÊÇʲô£¿ ²úÆ·¾ÀíÐèÒª¾ß±¸Ê²Ã´ÑùµÄÄÜÁ¦£¿ÈçºÎÅàÑø£¿
ÈçºÎÓë¿Í»§ÓÐЧ¹µÍ¨£¬´Ó¶ø·¢¾ò¿Í»§µÄÒþÐÔÐèÇó£¿ ÈçºÎ´Ó´óÁ¿µÄÐèÇóÐÅÏ¢ÖÐÌáÁ¶³öºËÐĵĿͻ§ÐèÇó£¿
ÈçºÎ²ß»®ÓоºÕùÁ¦µÄ²îÒ컯²úÆ·£¿ ÈçºÎÈ·±£²ß»®µÄºËÐÄÐèÇóÔÚ¿ª·¢¹ý³ÌÖб»³ä·ÖʵÏÖ£¿
ÈçºÎ°ÑвúÆ·³É¹¦µÄÍÆÏòÊг¡£¿ ÈçºÎ±ÜÃâ²úÆ·¾ÀíÂÙÂä³É¡°ÎÊÌâ¾Àí¡±£¿ ÈçºÎʵÏÖ²úÆ·¾Àí´Ó¡°µ¥Ìô¡±Ä£Ê½Ïò¡°´òȺ¼Ü¡±Ä£Ê½µÄת±ä£¿
ÈçºÎ¹¹½¨ÊʺϲúÆ·¾Àí³É³¤µÄÓÅÁ¼ÍÁÈÀ£¿ ¡¡ flashbench-results(a)lists.linaro.org
[...]
Content analysis details: (8.6 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: qq.com]
1.6 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available.
[111.176.68.106 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]
1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
[Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?111.176.68.106>]
3.6 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
[111.176.68.106 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.7 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
0.1 MISSING_MID Missing Message-Id: header
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: ÈÃÄúµÄÆóҵ֪ʶ°Ù·Ö°ÙÁ¢·½£¡ ÈÃÆóÒµÎÄÊé×ÊÁϵµ°¸¡¢¹¤³Ìµµ°¸¡¢¹¤ÒÕ¼¼Êõ¼°ÈËʲÆÎñµµ°¸¸ü¹æ·¶×¨Òµ¸ßЧ¹ÜÀí£¡
»ùÓÚÆóҵ֪ʶ¹ÜÀíµÄÏÖ´úÆóҵȫÃæµµ°¸¹ÜÀíʵÎñ ¡ª¡ª¡ª¡ª¡¶ÆóҵȫÃæµµ°¸¹ÜÀíÌåϵ¹¹½¨ÊµÎñ¸ß¼¶ÑÐÐÞ°à¡·
¡¾Ê±¼äµØµã¡¿ 2015Äê04ÔÂ10-11ÈÕÉϺ£¡¢04ÔÂ24-25ÈÕÉîÛÚ [...]
Content analysis details: (7.3 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: qq.com]
0.7 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
[116.207.12.251 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
3.6 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
1.6 RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT RBL: No description available.
[116.207.12.251 listed in bb.barracudacentral.org]
1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS
0.1 MISSING_MID Missing Message-Id: header
Spam detection software, running on the system "ip-10-142-244-252.ec2.internal",
has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
@@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details.
Content preview: Sveiki, Norime Jums pasiÅ«lyti bÅ«dÄ , kaip greitai susirasti
naujų klientų. Jei susidomÄjote, paraÅ¡ysime plaÄiau. [...]
Content analysis details: (5.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
1.2 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net
[Blocked - see <http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?188.69.209.20>]
2.7 RCVD_IN_PSBL RBL: Received via a relay in PSBL
[31.193.197.54 listed in psbl.surriel.com]
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information.
[URIs: fastemailsender.net]
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4 RBL: Very Good reputation (+4)
[31.193.197.54 listed in wl.mailspike.net]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(vertaskliento[at]gmail.com)
0.0 MIME_HTML_MOSTLY BODY: Multipart message mostly text/html MIME
0.7 MPART_ALT_DIFF BODY: HTML and text parts are different
0.3 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_04 BODY: HTML: images with 0-400 bytes of words
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders
0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image
The original message was not completely plain text, and may be unsafe to
open with some email clients; in particular, it may contain a virus,
or confirm that your address can receive spam. If you wish to view
it, it may be safer to save it to a file and open it with an editor.
