When there is a hit in a filter file does declude continue to procees the
filer or stop?
If it stops then it would be better to have the lines that hit the most at
the top of the filter text file.
I have already noticed we get the most HELO hits on our own IP addresses. So
with this thinking
I just registered and turned it on, and it seems to have a lot of spam IPs listed.
I'll keep an eye out for false positives.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Joshua Levitsky
Sent: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 10:43:24 -0400
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
- Original
- Original Message -
From: Bill B. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
I just registered and turned it on, and it seems to have a lot of spam IPs
listed. I'll keep an eye out for false
Yes, same here, I noticed that it is tagging IP's that have not been caught
by easynet or osirusoft.
Another really cool thing about this service, is the stat report they send
you at the end of the day, tells you what IP's they blocked for you, what
IP's you gave a good positive, and other
Joshua,
Sunday, July 27, 2003 you wrote:
JL Yes, but it depends on what large is.
It seems to me the statement applies to all businesses.
JL It was created by the guy that made Yahoo's groups before Yahoo
JL owned them.
Well, that isn't exactly a confidence builder for me for various
Hmm... I wonder how effectively that data could be used to generate lists of IPs to
block at the firewall level. That'll be interesting to look at.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Omar K.
Sent: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 18:32:53 +0200
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
- Original Message -
From: Omar K. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 12:32 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
Yes, same here, I noticed that it is tagging IP's that have not been
caught
by easynet or osirusoft.
Another
- Original Message -
From: Smart Business Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joshua Levitsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
The problem I have is that I have no way of knowing the cost of
this service
- Original Message -
From: Bill B. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
Hmm... I wonder how effectively that data could be used to generate lists
of IPs to block at the firewall level.
I was thinking more along the lines of seeing in the report that particular IPs send
us 100% spam, so then I'd manually add those IPs to our firewall rules.
But I just signed up today and I haven't seen my first Trustic report yet, so I don't
know whats possible yet.
Bill
-Original
I've just started forwarding spam to them, but only the stuff that comes
in from Imail's content filtering, which is basically just sweeping up
after Declude (and it STILL bags about 10% of the survivors!).
One thing I was REALLY not happy about was their method of adding
default positives
- Original Message -
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 1:35 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
One thing I was REALLY not happy about was their method of adding
default positives (i.e. the originally
I just verified a piece of spam that originated from a dialup IP. Now
its in my list and I see Trustic has listed that IP as a trusted
server... Its loaded with automatic recommendations from that stupid
auto-positive list. In fact the last four spams come from servers
marked as 'Trusted'.
- Original Message -
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
I just verified a piece of spam that originated from a dialup IP. Now
its in my list and I see Trustic has
*I* manually marked them as negatives, and my one manual entry showed up
as such correctly But that IP had four more entries showing the
automated 'default positive' entries, and apparently that was enough to
get this dialup IP listed as 'trusted' within the system... And as I
noted its not
- Original Message -
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
Could that have been the idea in the first place? Who knows anything
about these guys?
While I can only speak
- Original Message -
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 4:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
I'd leave this service alone for awhile so they can get their act
together. They may call this a beta but it
Indeed, I think you should forward your legit concerns to them if you truly
want to make a positive difference.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Levitsky
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 10:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
Omar K. wrote:
Indeed, I think you should forward your legit concerns to them if you
truly
want to make a positive difference.
It was precisely the desire to make a positive difference that motivated
me to describe my experience to the list.
For my part I appreciate it if an early adopter subs
I can understand how you'd be defensive since you recommended them to
the list, but this has nothing to do with sentiment and everything to do
with empirical observation of specific results. I'm sorry you feel the
way you do, but don't bandy about words like 'slander' when clearly they
don't
- Original Message -
From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 7:14 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
63.149.203.45
5 automated positive recommendations and a trusted server.
But here they're listed on
Sunday, July 27, 2003 you wrote:
JL I'm not trying to make this an argument.
That's funny.
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Smart Business Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joshua Levitsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
Sunday, July 27, 2003 you wrote:
JL I'm not trying to make this an argument.
That's
I have been reading all the posts about TRUSTIC.
I really dont want to say ,its bad or good , because this not the right time
to make comments about.
It's a new service , the database should get bigger in time ,the site must
be popular and be used by a big number of
server admin and then WE CAN
Why don't you guys give it a rest.
On 07/27/03 8:53pm you wrote...
- Original Message -
From: Smart Business Lists [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Joshua Levitsky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..
Sunday, July 27,
http://www.trustic.com/ip?ip=63.149.203.45+
You were one of the positives and you didn't bother to submit spam to
make
it not trusted.
Wrong repeatedly. I sent spam to them as I've already said. All of it
at one point.
As you later note this is becoming a pi$$ing match and that doesn't
belong
All tiffs aside :),
Can I get some clarity on the operation here? If I personally submit an
e-mail that says 10.10.10.10 is a spammer IP, and that same address has
10 positives and 1 negative (Me). I understand that the IP will
probably be trusted, but is there something in the background that
Starting Friday night, most of the users of the various domains on my
server have been complaining of a massive flood of spam. I would say the
spam traffic I have seen has easily tripled or quadrupled this weekend.
It's unreal. I myself have received over 800 spam emails in the past 24
hours.
28 matches
Mail list logo
