Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is this unique?

Scott - We are getting a lot of spam with this text in the email: x-mac-type=4A504547; x-mac-creator=4A565752 Question - can I filter on this or is this a common MAC string? Thanks -Nick Hayer --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is this unique?

Nick Hayer wrote: Scott - We are getting a lot of spam with this text in the email: x-mac-type=4A504547; x-mac-creator=4A565752 Question - can I filter on this or is this a common MAC string? These are file attachments that have come from a Mac email client, probably Outlook Express. The

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is this unique?

On 25 Aug 2004 at 15:18, E. Ballerini wrote: Hi Erminio - I saw this explanation on a google search - my question is are the id's unique to this mac client eg ok to filter on? Thanks -Nick Hayer These are file attachments that have come from a Mac email client, probably Outlook Express.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is this unique?

Nick Hayer wrote: On 25 Aug 2004 at 15:18, E. Ballerini wrote: Hi Erminio - I saw this explanation on a google search - my question is are the id's unique to this mac client eg ok to filter on? Thanks -Nick Hayer As I understand it, the combination x-mac-type=4A504547; x-mac-creator=4A565752

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Chinese vs NONEnglish

While the NONENGLISH test is pretty effective (99%+) it does trip up occasionally. Our company does some business internationally so it's a tough area. Unfortunately for me the NONENGLISH test has false positives on the company that owns me (Australian company) and some of my own test mail as

[Declude.JunkMail] Bypassing mime segments revisit

I know this has been discussed before several times but is there any plan to allow body filters to bypass mime segments except if it is text/html? The majority of my false positives are words (mainly porn related) found in the encoding of jpegs and gifs, especially on commonly misspelled

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Bypassing mime segments revisit

I know this has been discussed before several times but is there any plan to allow body filters to bypass mime segments except if it is text/html? Yes; this is something that we would like to do. However, accurate MIME decoding is very complex (and therefore becomes a large project).

[Declude.JunkMail] Sending attachments to the list

Jeff and all, do not attempt to send attachments other than text files to the list. 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

[Declude.JunkMail] Comments in ipfile filter?

Can the ipfile filter list contain comments between lines. Will this cause the filter to stop at the first comment? Are comments ignored? Example: Xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx #comment Xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Eddie Cornejo --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Comments in ipfile filter?

Can the ipfile filter list contain comments between lines. Will this cause the filter to stop at the first comment? Are comments ignored? Example: Xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx #comment Xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx The comments are allowed, and processing will continue -- so in this case, 2 lines would be processed, and

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Incoming message

Title: Message Ok, so who's the list member which is infected by the NetSky virus??? From: stmary-1-306.atm-cip.trvnet.net [64.71.64.38] AS: 64.71.64.0/19 AS14814 Twin Rivers Valley Internet Serv Livermore/Iowa The virus is being sent to the list and to the list members. Andrew.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Incoming message

Since this virus has been around since May 2004 (and there have been virus definitions that detect it since then as well), a better question, might be why didn't Declude catch this before it was sent to everyone on the list? --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Incoming message

Since this virus has been around since May 2004 (and there have been virus definitions that detect it since then as well), a better question, might be why didn't Declude catch this before it was sent to everyone on the list? Because no virus was sent to the list. :) The E-mail was a 0-byte

[Declude.JunkMail] Log Information

Hi, Is there a log file analyzer that will report on messages received by hour. I am interested in knowing how many e-mails came in between 3 and 4 and then between 4 and 5 etc. Thanx Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus

[Declude.JunkMail] User vs Domain .junkmail files

Hi, I have a client who wants me to process their mail (store and forward) for Anti-Virus but only want a few users in the domain to have their mail processed for SPAM. So I was thinking that I would put IGNORE actions in the $default$.junkmail files and create the individual user.junkmail with

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] User vs Domain .junkmail files

My big question is which .junkmail file has precedence the user or domain? The per-user config files have precedence. Also I know that in this configuration all the mail for the domain in question has to be processed for SPAM and then most of it ignored because of the IGNORE actions in the domain

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User vs Domain .junkmail files

Scott, They will probably still be scanned, but there should be only a minimal performance hit as a result. Wouldn't the performance hit be the same as any mail being scanned? Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User vs Domain .junkmail files

They will probably still be scanned, but there should be only a minimal performance hit as a result. Wouldn't the performance hit be the same as any mail being scanned? Correct. However, it is very rare for a server to have enough resources to accept/process/deliver E-mail without having

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User vs Domain .junkmail files

OK got it. Thanx Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 7:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User vs

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Incoming message

That makes perfect sense! Thanks, Scott. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wolf Tombe Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 4:44 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Incoming message Since this virus has been around since

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Information

Goran, You can grep your logs out and use DLAnalyzer for this. For example: grep -i 8/13/2004 14: dec0813.log newlogfile.txt Than rename the log file to dec0813.log and than process.. Darrell

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Information

Darrell I was hoping for more of a histogram of the number of messages processed by hour or half hour. My first thought would be to just get info on simply messages by hour and then maybe if I see a spike I could rerun it to see who was sending/receiving during that time. Thanx Goran

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Information

If your looking for more of a histogram of the number of messgaes processed we have MRTG scripts that interface with Imail/Declude to provide you this information. This may or may not be what your looking for... Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: Darrell I was hoping for more of a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Information

- Original Message - From: Goran Jovanovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was hoping for more of a histogram of the number of messages processed by hour or half hour. My first thought would be to just get info on simply messages by hour and then maybe if I see a spike I could rerun it to see