RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-17 Thread Markus Gufler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank Bill,The value is in scoring the last hop hits higher than prior hop hits. In this case, a hit on XBL for the last appropriate hop (not IPBYPASSED) would result in 8 points (6 + 2), while a hit on a prior ho

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-17 Thread Darrell LaRock
Matt, But if you rename the tests to DYN than how you are configuring non-DUL tests twice? Darrell From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 6:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-17 Thread Matt
Markus Gufler wrote: But there are other tests like FIVETEN-SRC that has had a wrong result in the same range for 9100 messages. The question is if FIVETEN-SRC allows a %IP4R% lookup. They are all in fact IP4R lookups (if that is what the test is set for). If you set Declude to

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-17 Thread Matt
Darrell LaRock wrote: Matt, But if you rename the tests to DYN than how you are configuring non-DUL tests twice? For DUL-type tests, I am only configuring them once, i.e. DNSRBL-DYN dnsbl %IP4R%.dun.dnsrbl.net 127.0.0.3 0 0 NJABL-DYN-A dnsbl

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-17 Thread Don Brown
] AS Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank AS This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust based upon the 'from AS Address.' There was no choice but to skip DUL/DYNA/DUHL tests (which were AS the only ones skipped) when the 'from address' was spoofed as a local

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-16 Thread Don Brown
Message- AS From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Brown AS Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 04:19 PM AS To: Matt AS Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AS Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank AS This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Matt
In absentia... http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg17162.html This made a lot of sense before, and it was the only way to disable DUL tests for local users prior to IMail 8 and JunkMail ~1.76. Declude won't disable the tests for gatewayed domains, only where an address matches

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Andy Schmidt
Title: Message Thanks - ouch. I'd say that's a bug in design. Since AUTH is supported in Imail 8 and since others may not allow local users to send through their Imail server (my outbound is going through IIS SMTP with SMTP AUTH), there should be AT LEAST a config option to turn this

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Matt
lf Of Matt Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 01:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank In absentia... http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg17162.html This made a lot of sense before, and it was the only way

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Don Brown
This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust based upon the 'from Address.' There was no choice but to skip DUL/DYNA/DUHL tests (which were the only ones skipped) when the 'from address' was spoofed as a local address. Imail 8 and WHITELIST AUTH help, but they don't solve this issue,

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread serge
- From: Don Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 8:19 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust based upon the 'from Address.' There was no choice

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Andy Schmidt
- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Brown Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 04:19 PM To: Matt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust based upon the 'from Address

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Andy Schmidt
-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Don Brown Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 04:19 PM To: Matt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-15 Thread Matt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Don Brown Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 04:19 PM To: Matt Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank This wasn't a bug or a larger issue of Declude trust based

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Matt
Scott, I seem to have broken things worse :) Is there any reason why the following wouldn't work? XBL(LAST) dnsbl %REMOTEIP%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org 127.0.0.4 6 0 I tested the DUL lists using this format and it seemed to be working. Here's the headers from a single hop test that tripped on

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread R. Scott Perry
I seem to have broken things worse :) Is there any reason why the following wouldn't work? XBL(LAST)dnsbl%REMOTEIP%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org127.0.0.4 60 I tested the DUL lists using this format and it seemed to be working. Here's the headers from a single hop test

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Matt
DOH! And unfortunately I just finished backing out of the changes :) Thanks for the clarification/correction. Matt R. Scott Perry wrote: I seem to have broken things worse :) Is there any reason why the following wouldn't work? XBL(LAST)dnsbl%REMOTEIP%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Don Brown
Friday, May 14, 2004, 11:36:22 AM, R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I seem to have broken things worse :) Is there any reason why the following wouldn't work? XBL(LAST)dnsbl%REMOTEIP%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org127.0.0.4 60 I tested the DUL lists using this

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Matt
Don, Since I started this thread, I'll try to answer what's at issue here. Declude has functionality to only scan the last hop on any dnsbl, ip4r and rhsbl test when it has either DUL, DYNA or DUHL in the name of the test. This is done in order to protect you from scoring hits on dial-up or

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Bill Landry
- Original Message - From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] XBL(LAST)dnsbl%IP4R%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org127.0.0.4 60 XBL(ALL)ip4rsbl-xbl.spamhaus.org 127.0.0.420 Scott/Matt, would a configuration like above require multiple DNS queries since the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread R. Scott Perry
XBL(LAST)dnsbl%IP4R%.sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org127.0.0.4 60 XBL(ALL)ip4rsbl-xbl.spamhaus.org 127.0.0.420 Scott/Matt, would a configuration like above require multiple DNS queries since the hostnames defined in the tests are no longer identical? Or is

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Matt
Bill, The value is in scoring the last hop hits higher than prior hop hits. In this case, a hit on XBL for the last appropriate hop (not IPBYPASSED) would result in 8 points (6 + 2), while a hit on a prior hop would result in just 2 points. Note that the number of false positives is much

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Andy Schmidt
Title: Message Matt, I think there is a misunderstanding (possibly on MY side). DUL/DYNA/DUHL tests from hitting your own local users when they are sending E-mail (only one hop and typically dynamic/residential), Declude disables any dnsbl, ip4r or rhsbl test when they have one of those

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Matt
Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 02:41 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank Don, Since I started this thread, I'll try to an

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Don Brown
See below Friday, May 14, 2004, 5:22:35 PM, Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M Andy Schmidt wrote: M Matt, M   M I think there is a misunderstanding (possiblyon MY side). M   MDUL/DYNA/DUHL tests from hitting your ownlocal users when M they are sending E-mail (only one hop and M

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DUL skipping was ISBLANK is blank

2004-05-14 Thread Andy Schmidt
Title: Message Scott (in case you're not gone yet): At this moment, Declude will not apply scores from any dnsbl, ip4r or rhsbl tests if they have either DUL, DYNA or DUHL in the name AND the Mail From matches a local user. Does Declude REALLY trust the mail from and will bypass