Please see below... Thanks! At 04:05 PM 2/25/2002, you wrote:
>>>Well, the best way to handle this is for the admin at the remote mail >>>server to add a reverse DNS entry (which the RFCs do require, even >>>though many mail servers do not have a reverse DNS entry), and to get >>>ACT to get their act together and follow the RFCs. >> >>They are sending through our mail server, and we do have reverse DNS >>configured for the domain of >>the mail server. For the others - which are "virtuals" under IMAIL - >>what reverse DNS do we need - >>for their website? > >Your end appears to be fine, the issue is on your customer's end. They >need a reverse DNS entry for the computer that is sending the mail. Unfortunately, all our customers are using different ISPs and most do not set this up. Also, their IP is dynamically assigned, so the ISPs are dropping the ball on the whole pool. >>They are running the latest version. Apparently, Symantec sold Act to >>another group that has not >>updated it in about a year. Yes, they SHOULD fix this, > >They definitely should fix this -- it's a very serious problem, and will >cause the E-mail that is sent out to often simply disappear (either >deleted by a mail server that won't handle broken E-mails, caught as spam, >or lost in an inbox). Absolutely! >>but in the mean time, for our customers, >>we need to handle the situation as it is, not as it should be. > >Understood. In that case, you'll need to whitelist that user (or disable >the test(s) that they are failing). Yep.... >>Is there a way to eliminate this single test? It is causing false >>positives, both with this & Cold Fusion >>customers (CFMAIL also leaves out the Message-ID) > >In that case, you simply disable the SPAMHEADERS test. > >The Message-ID: test is one of the most important pieces, since [1] lots >of spam is sent without the Message-ID: header, [2] all standard mail >clients add the header, and [3] any automated program that doesn't include >one does so knowing that the mail it sends may be treated as spam. That >doesn't mean that the SPAMHEADERS test (or this piece of it) is good for >everyone. However, the more people that use it, the easier it will be to >detect spam (as ACT, CF and other poorly designed programs get fixed). > -Scott > >--- >[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 PROTECTED], and >type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". You can E-mail >[EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web >site at http://www.declude.com . --- [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 PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". You can E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. You can visit our web site at http://www.declude.com .
