@declude.com
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:00
PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
Whitelisted address getting trapped anyway
You might need WHITELIST from .xx.com
(the smtp sender address looks to be in the fromat [EMAIL PROTECTED])
- Original Message -
From
check your declude logs.. post them here, they would be
able to give us more info
Luis Arango
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harry
VanderzandSent: Sábado, 18 de Marzo de 2006 11:18
a.m.To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject:
Harry,
This is the actual sender of the email
X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [63.251.135.75]
Not
From: Ken Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David B
www.declude.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
You might need WHITELIST from .xx.com
(the smtp sender address looks to be in the fromat [EMAIL PROTECTED])
- Original Message -
From:
Harry Vanderzand
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:17
AM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail]
um, there are 2 X-Declude-Tests lines. One of them is
proably added by the sender (likely the whitelisted line). Note that there
are also 2 X-Declude-Spoolname lines with different
spoolnames.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan
DuncanSent:
l'Impôt
Tel: 613-235-6704 ext 240
Fax: 613-234-7290
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.ute-sei.org/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dan Horne
Sent: June 6, 2005 2:44 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail
It likely means that the sender also uses Declude and scans
outgoing email.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan
DuncanSent: Monday, June 06, 2005 3:05 PMTo:
Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail]
whitelisted
We tag email with the subject tag SPAM*- when email gets a score of
higher than 10.
What happened here. It says that it was whitelisted but it still tagged
with SPAM*-
What happened here is that someone got an E-mail with *SPAM in the
subject, and replied to it:
Subject: RE: *SPAM -FW:
Nevermind!
Is it Friday yet?
- Original Message -
From:
Jay
Calvert
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:17
PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail]
Whitelisted[0]
Hi all,
We tag email with the subject tag "SPAM*-" when
email gets a score of
1:44 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Andy,
This works because the action on the Postmaster test is ROUTETO back to
the
postmaster.
How it works
[1] Lowers the weight of the email by 100 so that the message will not be
held
or deleted in our system
[2] Re
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Andy,
This works because the action on the Postmaster test is ROUTETO back to
the
postmaster.
How it works
[1] Lowers the weight of the email by 100 so
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Richard,
In my experience it is not a good idea to whitelist the postmaster account
for the exact reasons you posted below. If you have the postmaster account
whitelisted any incoming spam with multiple recipients listed
On 19 May 2004 at 9:04, Richard Farris wrote:
Kinda - there is a test called
BYPASSWHITELIST
http://www.mail-
archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg17561.html
Hope this helps!
-Nick Hayer
I have noticed that some of the spam getting thru is because a I have
several in my whitelist and even
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 12:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Richard,
This is a common problem especially when dealing with postmaster account.
Most people whitelist
]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Richard,
This is a common problem especially when dealing with postmaster account.
Most people whitelist postmaster and because spammers know this they often
include a postmaster address because they know the message (even
201 934-9206
http://www.HM-Software.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 02:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted- getting thru
Andy,
This works
That's one of those Habeas header emails.
Whitelisting them lately has been a very bad idea. It's nice though that they
always seem to mark their spam with a low priority. I just sort by priority and
I can select all the offenders and forward them to spamcop.
--Joshua Levitsky, MCSE,
I'm getting spam, and it is being whitelisted because of HABEAS... Here are
the headers.
These emails are definately spam. Looks like HABEAS has been compromised?
Yes; the pharmacourt.biz spammers have infringed on the Habeas intellectual
property rights. Habeas is going after them. Until
These emails are definately spam. Looks like HABEAS has been compromised?
More like spammers are forging habeas headers and challenging habeus'
ability to prosecute.
Larry Craddock
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from
Fwiw.. I would never whitelist any email based solely because they warranted
it to be spam free... Email headers can and do get forged all the time. I
have recently sent them a letter and a lot of porno and spam email for them
to review..
~Rick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
I received 13 of these today in my personal e-mail. I changed Habeas
from whitelist to weight -5 and it seems to have fixed the problem.
Don't know yet if non spam is getting blocked but I doubt it.
Here is a log entry after change (weight was 36 even with the -5):
01/13/2004 11:09:12
I got that this morning as well.
I commented out the HABEAS test.
- Original Message -
From: andyb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:13 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] whitelisted
HI,
I'm getting spam, and it is being whitelisted because of
Andy, Habeas has not been compromised. Since Saturday, a spammer has been
using the Habeas warrant in the headers to get his junk past
configurations like yours.
This header text is easy to insert. Note that the X-Mailer: header is also
being faked. Each of the spams I've seen like this have
This was whitelisted as it is/was part of the default config file...
- Original Message -
From: Rick Klinge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] whitelisted
Fwiw.. I would never whitelist any email based solely
I have been reporting as they come up.
Thanks, Andy
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] whitelisted
I'm getting spam, and it is being whitelisted because of HABEAS
-
From: Colbeck, Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:46 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] whitelisted
Andy, Habeas has not been compromised. Since Saturday, a spammer has been
using the Habeas warrant in the headers to get his junk past
configurations
On their website you can report the spam and they will go after them... in
theory... but for now because so many people are bundling the headers in
spam you should probably not whitelist Habeas headers.
--
Joshua Levitsky, MCSE, CISSP
System Engineer
Time Inc. Information Technology
[5957 F27C
Ok I admit I'm pretty weak in the area of tweaking declude but why was this
whitelisted? I have three whitelist lines in my global.cfg ... they are
WHITELIST HABEAS
and 2 WHITELIST[EMAIL PROTECTED] lines ...
What does the Declude JunkMail log file say?
Is one of those two WHITELIST
. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted?
Ok I admit I'm pretty weak in the area of tweaking declude but why was
this
whitelisted? I have three whitelist lines in my global.cfg ... they are
WHITELIST
Well I'm not sure how I missed this ... but here's the *rest* of the header
info:
...
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to http://www.habeas.com/report/.
Now what do I do?
Have you reported it yet?
The Habeas headers are a legal
Cool ... I'll report it right now.
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelisted?
Well I'm not sure how I missed this ... but here's the *rest* of the
header
info
At 06:04 AM 1/12/2004, R. Scott Perry wrote:
The Habeas headers are a legal means of whitelisting E-mail. In this
case, a spam illegally used the Habeas headers -- something that the
people that are behind Habeas have been waiting years for. Now is the
true test of Habeas -- if they go after
WHITELIST FROM hm-software.com
Change it to:
WHITELIST FROM @hm-software.com
I believe this will do what you need. At least I hope so as this is what I
have been doing...
Sheldon
Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partnerhttp://www.tenforward.com
Ten Forward Communications
33 matches
Mail list logo
