Scott,
Would it be possible to add the filter name to the log entry indicating the
SKIPIFWEIGHT action (samples below).
12/09/2003 00:01:14 Q5703017b01e6dac7 Filter: Not skipping E-mail due to
current weight of 36.
12/09/2003 00:01:14 Q5703017b01e6dac7 FILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current
Would it be possible to add the filter name to the log entry indicating the
SKIPIFWEIGHT action (samples below).
12/09/2003 00:01:14 Q5703017b01e6dac7 Filter: Not skipping E-mail due to
current weight of 36.
12/09/2003 00:01:14 Q5703017b01e6dac7 FILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current
weight of 61
We've recently learned about Web-o-Trust (WOT), which is a whitelisting
system that has a lot of potential. Specifically, you whitelist your own
IPs, and then link to others that you want whitelisted.
For example, we've created a file at http://www.declude.com/web-o-trust.txt
that lists the
I have a customer whose is subscribed to some ezine cooking
recipes. She is supposed to receive and email each day with a new recipe,
however, I believe that the Imail statistical filter is catching the emails.
Below is what the company sent here showing that our mail server was
receiving
In using the WHITELISTFILE option can the subdomain be example.com or must
it be .example.com?
In other words, if I want to whitelist mail from a domain that also has
subdomains can I just use the entry of example.com or am I required to
have the multiple entries of @example.com and .example.com?
I have a customer whose is subscribed to some ezine cooking
recipes. She is supposed to receive and email each day with a new recipe,
however, I believe that the Imail statistical filter is catching the
emails.
Below is what the company sent here showing that our mail server was
receiving
In using the WHITELISTFILE option can the subdomain be example.com or must
it be .example.com?
It should be .example.com, @example.com, or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]. example.com by itself is not recommended.
In other words, if I want to whitelist mail from a domain that also has
subdomains can I just
So, my request is that people go to http://www.web-o-trust.org and set up
your own WOT file, and then let me know the URL of your WOT file
(preferably off-list, to reduce traffic to this list). I'll add you to
our WOT file, which is being used by many/most other people using
Web-o-Trust, so
Any one see legit coming from this domain? All I see are spam.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
---
[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
Where I can find documentation on how to use COUNTRY filters ??
Did not find anything on the manual.
Thanks.
---
[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
Where I can find documentation on how to use COUNTRY filters ??
Did not find anything on the manual.
It's an experimental feature -- if you go to http://www.mail-archive.com
and search for all_list, you'll find the information on how to set it up.
Yes, very large french ISP.
Best Regards
Andy Schmidt
HM Systems Software, Inc.
600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203
Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846
Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206
http://www.HM-Software.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have a colleague who was listed as open relay by ORDB, spamcop,
etc
We have since closed his relay. Running Exchange server 2000. He was
taken off the ORDB list but still gets reported by Spamcop. I receive
daily notifications from spamcop that his IP is blacklisted. ORDB
tested his IP
For the folks I have helped get out of spamcop you basically go to the site
and thier listing and request removal. Has this process changed?
Darrell
Check Out DLAnalyzer a comprehensive reporting tool for
Declude Junkmail Logs -
Scott, I looked into this several months ago, but at the time it did not
seem to be getting much interest, and still doesn't appear to have much of a
following (maybe 100 participants so far on their list).
That's correct. But about half of them joined within the past few
days. When I first
I was curious if anyone has seen a message like
this. My brother is getting this bounce when sending through Quest to some
of his recipients. I assume that what is happening is that the Quest mail
server is blacklisted by the remote mail server?
---
- Original
Scott, I looked into this several months ago, but at the time it did not
seem to be getting much interest, and still doesn't appear to have much of a
following (maybe 100 participants so far on their list). However, I am
willing to give it a go. Question, how do we use this with Declude
Exactly right, Todd. I think qmail has the nicest error reporting of any
smtp server; you can actually take the report at face value.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: Todd - Smart Mail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 1:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
HI,
Is there a way to block email from a specific
email address, or only one of my customers?
Thanks, Andy
I have a gateway server that declude Junkmail Pro and Declude Virus are
installed on along with Imail 7.15. Every week or two weeks my mail will be
delayed between 2 to 4 or even 6 hours. This machine is a Dual PIII 866 1GB
Ram, 80 GB IDE Hard Drive 3 com 10/100 NIC. My question is what can I
Title: Message
Andy,
You
may want to take a look at my WAMCHECK program. It is a user level
whitelist/blacklist program. Several people have downloaded it and the
comments that I have gotten back are positive.
Also,
ITS FREE.
http://www.wamusa.com/wamcheck
Thanks,
Bill
I think WOT could be very worth while for the 10-15 minutes it takes to
setup.
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Web-o-Trust
Scott, I looked into this several
Do you get titles, such as flight-attendant, engineer, pilot etc? G
(Adding a fringe benefit like this usually improves participation.)
---
[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
I couldn't get the find 12:10 14: sys1210.txt | find deliver /c to work
so I ran
find deliver log1210.txt /c and find deliver log1209.txt /c
12-09-03 32,094
12-10-03 19,276 @ 4:15PM
Now remember that this is happening once or twice a week. Is this low?
high? Do I need to up the Processor
I couldn't get the find 12:10 14: sys1210.txt | find deliver /c to work
That will work if you use the sys*.txt log file format. If you use the
log*.txt log file format, it will be different (perhaps 12/10/2003 14:
instead of 12:10 14:?).
so I ran
find deliver log1210.txt /c and find deliver
Pardon my jumping in this discussion late:
How do the names get added to the list (or web-o-trust)?
It appears that companies say, I'm not a spammer, trust me! What
keeps the spammers of the list?
The distributed nature of the management is what keeps the time
commitment down, but at the same
How do the names get added to the list (or web-o-trust)?
By getting someone to trust them.
For example, we're asking that our customers let us know that they have set
up a WOT file, and we add them to our WOT file, which a lot of people
already trust.
It appears that companies say, I'm not a
From what I read so far, the idea is that you need someone ELSE (who
him/herself was trusted before) to trust you (e.g., Scott has offered to
trust his customers.)
Basically, you whitelist yourself and then decide who you want to trust.
The trust can be transitive and you can define how many
Well, I can help a little with the batch command:
find 12:10 14: sys1210.txt | find /c for delivery
The only problem with Scott's suggestion was the missing character. On
my IMail gateway, the fixed batch command actually doubles the number of
messages delivered, because deliver appears in
Hi,
It also opens another option for lazy/ignorant sysops who don't want to
correctly configure their mail servers. Now you can tell them: Sorry I
don't white-list individual servers, but, you can white-list yourself by
adding your servers to WOT.
Best Regards
Andy Schmidt
HM Systems Software,
That sounds reasonable.
You wrote of a process to compile a whitelist (implemented as negative
weight on a blacklist). Does this process walk to all of the includes
and their include, etc. to create the whitelist file?
Todd Holt
Xidix Technologies, Inc
Las Vegas, NV USA
www.xidix.com
I am running Windows DNS and the gateway server is the only machine that
access to the DNS server. I also have another Gateway server that has about
the same hardware specs, but a whole different set of domains that it
happens to every once in a while too. If I were to upgrade my hardware what
What if a spammer get into the loop? and corrupts the shared whitelist? is
this possible?
So Let me summarize the way I think this works.
1) I setup a WOT file for my domain/server
2) I whitelist entries the WOT file
3) I link the WOT file to other trusted WOT files
4) The linked WOTs have
I'm with Todd here. I see very little value here. I don't have a
problem with blocking E-mail from providers that aren't involved in bulk
mailing or don't have large communities of unregulated users. This
might help with some false positives related to administrator
discussions of banned
Title: Message
Is there any way to get this to only log
hits? It is logging everything now, from what I can see.
I've read the on-line doc, in one place it says it
assigns a 1, 100or a 0 for declude.
I'm not sure how it is working with the weighting
system... I just need to simply
Well,
Your try it
if it doesn't work, or gets abused, you get rid of it..
It just *might* help.
- Original Message -
From: Matthew Bramble [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 6:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Web-o-Trust
I'm with Todd
If someone can show me the value of crediting points to hosts which
account for almost none of my mail volume, over which I have no
familiarity with their rules and procedures, and for which I am not aware
of any substantial problems, I will definitely reconsider my stance.
Very well stated!
You wrote of a process to compile a whitelist (implemented as negative
weight on a blacklist). Does this process walk to all of the includes
and their include, etc. to create the whitelist file?
Yes. It's designed to follow the rules of Web-o-Trust, and include/omit
IPs as determined by your
What if a spammer get into the loop? and corrupts the shared whitelist? is
this possible?
It can happen, but a spammer would have to do a lot of work for little
payout. They would have to get someone to trust them to get in the loop,
while not knowing how many people will trust them -- and not
That is way too broad and general a statement.
My server doesn't NOT allow most spam to pass.
I would think most mail admins that would take advantage
of WOT would already have their servers setup so they would pass most spam
tests anyways. Why whitelist senders that wouldn't have failed
So how can this be added to Declude for negative weight?
Using an IP blacklist, with a negative weight, such as:
WOT ipfile D:\IMail\Declude\wotfile.txt x -10 x
You'll need to create wotfile.txt, using collate from
http://www.web-o-trust.org , which uses Python, or the tool we are
As with all such networks, as this grows larger, the potential for
problems also grows. Spamcop for instance has suffered greatly from a
large number of anti-commercialism administrators or people that are just
plain irresponsible reporting their spam, and a system like this
represents a
After reading the WOT site and the posts here. I think the best use for this
is a dynamic trusted whitelist. For example I have my mail server and my
gateway mail servers. My web servers that send out notices and our
orderentry server that sends out emails. I would list all of these IPs in my
WOT
Scott,
I think the attempt is admirable, as it is with the RBL's and anyone
else that contributes to the greater good, however I strongly believe
that the approach is flawed. I've had similar discussions regarding
shared blacklists and the same issue comes up over and over
again...there
I think the attempt is admirable, as it is with the RBL's and anyone else
that contributes to the greater good, however I strongly believe that
the approach is flawed. I've had similar discussions regarding shared
blacklists and the same issue comes up over and over again...there needs
to be
What is the OS that Imail is on and what is the OS of the DNS servers?
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kris McElroy
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:16
I think ultimately it would be good to rank by trust, e.g., with hundreds
of thousands of entries, there will be some that MANY will trust, others
will never be trusted - any everything in-between.
If this could be translated into a weighted list - then it would
self-correct any odd-balls and
Without have to create a list of some
sort, no.
If you are willing to list them out, there
are 2 ways. One is WamCheck, an external program for Declude that has been
posted in response to this.
Another is a program I have called match.
It checks the from address against a file called
Still trying to digest all the info.
begin with. Maybe it might be useful to have a conversation about
alternative uses for such a program? I'm definitely interested in
sharing some whitelists and blacklists based on the above stated
criteria, but only if we could all agree on definitions,
Well let's try to have a discussion about sharing lists, if anyone is in
fact interested.
It takes a lot of effort to identify IP blocks for white, gray and black
lists. I've seen some people include whole class C's without seemingly
verifying that they were all under the control of one
Ha - I'd love for spammers to create WOTs with all of their current IPs. All
we have to do is see the first spam, realize why it was whitelisted and then
blacklist their entire range.
A dream come true.
Best Regards
Andy Schmidt
Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206
They are the same machine Windows 2000 Server. I installed DNS for
faster queries in case the remote server or local server where having
any issues.
Kris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff
(Lists)
Sent: Wednesday, December
At 06:27 PM 12/10/2003, you wrote:
I'm with Todd here. I see very little value here. I don't have a problem
with blocking E-mail from
snip
I'm not against the idea of having some form of a registry, however the
root of the problem is in differentiating among the gray stuff and not
among the
Since this came up, you might be aware that I have explored the idea of
making my site a membership site and along with that, performing
verification that a prospective member verify that they are running
Declude before getting access. I've also considered charging a small
fee for this as
I think ultimately it would be good to rank by trust, e.g., with hundreds
of thousands of entries, there will be some that MANY will trust, others
will never be trusted - any everything in-between.
If this could be translated into a weighted list - then it would
self-correct any odd-balls and
Hi Pete:
Very informative.
As much as I like and will support the concept, I couldn't help but cringe
that someone comes up with a new web-based system - and then defines their
proprietary formatting for their config file instead of trying to reuse
existing standards, e.g., adopting XML as a
As much as I like and will support the concept, I couldn't help but cringe
that someone comes up with a new web-based system - and then defines their
proprietary formatting for their config file instead of trying to reuse
existing standards, e.g., adopting XML as a format.
In general, though, XML
this this france telecom (french att) internet services
largest isp in france, with dialup and dsl customers
- Original Message -
From: John Tolmachoff (Lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:17 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] wanadoo.fr
At 08:53 PM 12/10/2003, you wrote:
Still trying to digest all the info.
begin with. Maybe it might be useful to have a conversation about
alternative uses for such a program? I'm definitely interested in
sharing some whitelists and blacklists based on the above stated
criteria, but only if
attached is a copy of my white list file that adds negative weight, i have
been adding to it for about one year now.
Sincerely,
William J. Baumbach II [EMAIL PROTECTED]
9975 Pennsylvania Ave. Manassas, Va. 20110-2028
Ph: 703-367-7900 ext:1708 Fax: 703-691-0946
$default$.junkmail
COUNTRIES WARN
COUNTRY WARN
GLOBAL.CFG
COUNTRIES filter C:\imail\declude\countries.txt x 0 0
COUNTRY filter C:\imail\declude\country.txt x 0 0
The first thing you have to do is download the database from
http://www.declude.com/release/177/all_list.dat . This needs
At 09:33 PM 12/10/2003, you wrote:
Hi Pete:
Very informative.
As much as I like and will support the concept, I couldn't help but cringe
that someone comes up with a new web-based system - and then defines their
proprietary formatting for their config file instead of trying to reuse
existing
62 matches
Mail list logo
