If I was going to setup Negative Weight on certain domains instead of
white listing them would I use just a standard sender blacklist with
negative weight
i.e.
DereaseWeight fromfile C:\IMail\Declude\badaddresses.txt x 0 5
Then inside the file I would use
@mail.southwest.com
Since the Declude
If I was going to setup Negative Weight on certain domains instead of
white listing them would I use just a standard sender blacklist with
negative weight
i.e.
DereaseWeight fromfile C:\IMail\Declude\badaddresses.txt x 0 5
Then inside the file I would use
@mail.southwest.com
Since the
Just for clarification,
The first weight is the weight applied if the test is failed, and the
second weight is if the test is passed.
In my case I would have @mail.southwest.com entered in the file and I
want to decrease the weight of the mail if the message is from the
@mail.southwest.com
If I was going to setup Negative Weight on certain domains instead of
white listing them would I use just a standard sender blacklist with
negative weight
DereaseWeight fromfile C:\IMail\Declude\badaddresses.txt x 0 5
Then inside the file I would use
@mail.southwest.com
Since the
The first weight is the weight applied if the test is failed, and the
second weight is if the test is passed.
Ah, I see what you're getting at. It gets confusing because there are two
meanings of negative weight (negative meaning that the E-mail didn't
fail the spam test, or negative as in
Discussion being continued off-list unless anyone else is interested..
I'd be interested, but could be included off-list if nobody else is...
Jeff Cochran
City of Naples, Florida
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
Scott,
Thank you for the clarification, the end of your message was what the
intended behavior I was looking for.
Darrell
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I would also be interested, either on or off list.
Justin Moose
Information Technology Manager
Sioux Valley Energy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Need
and I was wondering why the same entry is getting repeated multiple time.
I
am running Declude v1.66i7 with my log level set to low.
Multiple recipients?
John Tolmachoff MCSE, CSSA
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft, Inc.
Fullerton, CA 92835
www.reliancesoft.com
---
[This E-mail was
Okay, thanks for the explanations.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 9:38 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] JunkMail log entry questions
Scott, I found the
I have domains that are local that I host and several domains that I am
a gateway for.
Now when a message gets bounced for a local domain the following line
works fine. It will substitute the %localhost% for the domain that the
message was addressed to.
If you feel this message is in error
If you feel this message is in error please forward this message to
postmaster@%LOCALHOST%
However, for domains I gateway for it does not substitute the correct
the domain in that line. It always defaults to the mail servers primary
domain name instead of the domain in which the mail was
I know in the past it was discussion about legit base64 usage in mail.
I found what seems to be a legit e-mail where the mail client is
base64 encoding the message.
Received: from mail.XX.com [12.28.XX.XXX] by imail.fament.com with ESMTP
(SMTPD32-7.13) id A4EE26B0366; Wed, 15 Jan 2003
Reply to: R. Scott Perry
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] WhiteList Per User or Domain? on Monday 8:57:29 PM
Scott, do you know when these features might be in beta, including the
notification? We cannot use a global setup or most of our users would
not get mail. We are anxious to see this work. grin
I know in the past it was discussion about legit base64 usage in mail.
I found what seems to be a legit e-mail where the mail client is
base64 encoding the message.
The question here is what legitimate means.
Does it mean that it is a legitimate E-mail, which uses base64 encoding for
no
Well. When I say legit I reference in that it is not a spam mail but a
regular mail communication to a user that been sent with a regular
mail program.
Like you using Eudora Version 5.1 to send a e-mail message directly to
me. This person was using QuickMail Pro 3 (mac) to send a e-mail to a
Reply to: R. Scott Perry
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] WhiteList Per User or Domain? on Tuesday 2:58:10 PM
I have many domains and users on my system. Not all want this feature
so I need it as a Pro (per domain per user) feature... and as I
mentioned earlier, there should be
Wasn't sure if anyone ever found a e-mail client that did post
standard message in base64 besides what we frequently see from
spammers with advertisement junk in it.
Outlook Web Access on Exchange 2000.
John Tolmachoff MCSE, CSSA
IT Manager, Network Engineer
RelianceSoft, Inc.
Fullerton, CA
I have many domains and users on my system. Not all want this feature
so I need it as a Pro (per domain per user) feature... and as I
mentioned earlier, there should be notification to the user of
attempted delivery mailfroms... so he or she can add these to their
Thank you I had missed the OWA I added that one myself. Thanks.
Tuesday, January 21, 2003, 3:33:06 PM, you wrote:
CA As per John's earlier research on OWA as a client, and Eje's report I now
CA use this in one of my filter text files:
CA #Nov-29-2002 AC Cancel the BASE64 weight when the client
I have many domains and users on my system. Not all want this feature
so I need it as a Pro (per domain per user) feature...
We have not decided yet whether to add per-user or per-domain settings to
the AUTOWHITELIST option (our original thought is that almost everyone
would want to
Reply to: John Tolmachoff
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] WhiteList Per User or Domain? on Tuesday 3:40:53 PM
Is there a URL for this. Sorry if I don't have it, but I
am on many lists and sometimes I delete something that maybe
I should not have. g
Thanks again,
--
Roger Heath
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm doing some testing now with the following in the global.cfg file:
ALLMAILS1 weight x x -10 0
ALLMAILS2 weight x x -10 0
and the following in the .junkmail file:
ALLMAILS1 ATTACH
ALLMAILS2 ALERT
which should accomplish this.
The testing seems
Is there a URL for this. Sorry if I don't have it, but I
am on many lists and sometimes I delete something that maybe
I should not have. g
It is still in beta right now.
I think one of the Bills one this list can explain more, as he is using this
option.
http://www.noxmail.com/
While I never followed up or asked any ones opinion, not that it has
come up again, read through the attached text file and see what you
think.
I think, Ugh.
M$ at it again, and their faithful admins recite their inconsistent
rhetoric as if it's perfectly normal. As you point out, their
What I'd be most afraid of is that OWA is simply the first wave, and
that soon they will make Base64 the default for all their apps,
thereby killing the test entirely.
Oh great Sandy, just by you saying that it will probably happen. :((
John Tolmachoff MCSE, CSSA
IT Manager, Network
Title: Message
Hi;
In case you are
interested, we have created a simple Access database that contains all of our
entries in for our fromfile and filter files.
Since it is all in
the database we thought we can simply replicate it with the web site and provide
it to all to use or consider.
Eje,
I use QuickMail on a Mac and Base64 is used as the encoding type by two of their
standard configs, but only for attachments. Base64 encoding for the message body
requires a manual change. What most likely happened is that the sender in question
was swapping around encoding types trying
Hello Dan,
I see. Thanks for the clearification. This particular message was a html
encoded message where the html part got encoded.
Best regards,
Eje Gustafsson mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Family Entertainment Network http://www.fament.com
Phone : 620-231-
29 matches
Mail list logo
