Hi,

Well - yes, we do install the security fixes on a regular basis - and there
has been a round of updates recently.

Clients may not have discovered the problem for a few days.

Best Regards
Andy Schmidt

Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:    +1 201 934-9206 



-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T
(Lists)
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 08:04 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files


Any updates or patches recently applied?

John T
eServices For You

"Seek, and ye shall find!"


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> Heimir Eidskrem
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:46 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files
> 
> we are having the exact problem on one of our servers.
> We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size.
> They work fine at first but later they are corrupted.
> 
> Windows 2000 server.
> 
> I have no clue what it could be at this time.
> It started around this weekend I think.
> 
> Please keep me posted if you find something.
> 
> H.
> 
> 
> Andy Schmidt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase 
> > years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1).
> >
> > Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their 
> > FTP
space,
> > and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later 
> > the
data
> > is corrupted.
> >
> > I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to
appear
> > with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 
> > bytes.
When I
> > inspect the files I may see the "correct" data through a share, but 
> > if I access the files through some other method, I always see the 
> > byte
pattern of
> > 0xDF.
> >
> > I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, 
> > sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems "Windows 
> > replaced bad clusters in file xxxx". But, the problem recurred the 
> > next day.
> >
> > Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was 
> > truly
on
> > its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the 
> > data
it
> > would either get good or bad data.
> >
> > However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on 
> > an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a 
> > set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old).
> >
> > So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from 
> > entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the
chances
> > that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both 
> > on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 
> > MB
large.
> >
> > Now I'm wondering if this is some "software" issue.
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Andy Schmidt
> >
> > Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
> > Fax:    +1 201 934-9206
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David
> > Barker
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 
> > anew
> >
> > When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and 
> > the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in 
> > your
\Declude
> > directory.
> > This should contain the version and diagnostics. The valid options 
> > on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are:
> >
> > Decludeproc -v   displays the version and build
> >
> > Decludeproc -i   installs the decludeproc service
> >
> > Decludeproc -u   uninstalls the decludeproc service
> >
> > David B
> > www.declude.com
> >
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > Andy Schmidt
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 
> > anew
> >
> >
> > Dave -
> >
> > That's what I call catch 22:
> >
> > D:\IMail>decludeproc -diag
> > Invalid command line parameter:
> > -install     Install Declude
> > -diag        Print diagnostics
> >
> > Hm - so let's see, after "-install", I used "-diag" to figure out 
> > what's wrong. But, "-diag" is invalid. The ony valid parameters 
> > are...
"-install"
> > and "-diag"?
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Andy Schmidt
> >
> > Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
> > Fax:    +1 201 934-9206
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > Andy Schmidt
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 
> > anew
> >
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > thanks.
> >
> > Next question:
> >
> > I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2:
> >
> > AUTOFORGE ON
> >
> > BANEZIPEXTS ON
> >
> >
> > If I recall correctly, the idea was that:
> > BANZIPEXTS OFF
> > # BANEXT  EZIP
> > BANEZIPEXTS ON
> >
> > would PERMIT banned extensions inside zipped files (where they could 
> > be scanned), but DENY banned extensions if they were contained 
> > inside
encrypted
> > zipped files.
> >
> > Where those options forgotten in your config file - or are they no
longer
> > available in Version 3?
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Andy Schmidt
> >
> > Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
> > Fax:    +1 201 934-9206
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David
> > Barker
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 02:43 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 
> > anew
> >
> >
> > The Program Files\Declude is a temp directory that can be deleted 
> > after
the
> > install. The original purpose of this directory was to make 
> > available
the
> > latest configs as we do not overwrite your configs. This has since 
> > been removed in version 4.x where you will find a \Declude\Resources
directory
> > which has the same purpose.
> >
> > David B
> > www.declude.com
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
> > Andy Schmidt
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:36 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to set up a server from scratch and thus downloaded and 
> > ran:
> >
> > Declude_IM_N310.exe
> >
> > and chose the option to let it do its install (rather than the 
> > option
for
> > "experienced" admins).
> > PS - that screen has a typo!
> >
> > The setup created a
> >
> >     C:\Program Files\Declude
> >
> > folder that contains just the 5 config files it also created the 
> > SAME
files
> > in:
> >
> >     D:\Imail\Declude
> >
> > together with binaries and the various other Declude files.
> >
> > I'm at loss!
> >
> > Which location is the "right" one for the config files (I'm assuming 
> > the D:\Imail\Declude)?
> >
> > What's the point of creating a "dummy" Folder in the C:\Program 
> > Files\
that
> > contains no programs and that contains files that are not being used 
> > at
all
> > (assuming that being the case)?
> >
> > Should I be deleting this Program Files folder to avoid confusion 
> > when someone else maintains this server?
> >
> > Come on, the cold war has been over since Reagan - are we still 
> > trying
to
> > confuse the Russians?
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Andy Schmidt
> >
> > Phone:  +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
> > Fax:    +1 201 934-9206
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 03:25 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
> >
> >
> > Andrew,
> >
> > Thanks for your notes and their history.
> >
> > I'm using the following settings right now:
> >
> >
> >     THREADS        30
> >     WAITFORMAIL    500
> >     WAITFORTHREADS        200
> >     WAITBETWEENTHREADS    100
> >     WINSOCKCLEANUP        OFF
> >     INVITEFIX    ON
> >     AUTOREVIEW        ON
> >
> >
> > There are a few reasons for trying these values.
> >
> >
> >     THREADS 30 - I'm pretty confident that dual 3.2 Ghz Xeons and RAID 
> > can only handle 30 threads with average messages.  In reality, one
single
> > message can spike the system to 100%, but these are uncommon.  I 
> > figure
that
> > if I open this up too wide and I am dealing with a backup or 
> > something, launching more threads when at 100% CPU utilization will 
> > actually slow
the
> > system down.  This was the same with 2.x and before.  There is added 
> > overhead to managing threads and you don't want that to happen on 
> > top of 100% CPU utilization.  I am going to back up my server later 
> > tonight to
see
> > if I can't find what the magic number is since I don't want to be 
> > below
that
> > magic number, and it would probably be best to be a little above it.
> >
> >     WAITFORMAIL 500 - On my server, this never kicks in, but if it did, 
> > it wouldn't make sense to delay for too long because I could build 
> > up messages.  A half second seems good.
> >
> >     WAITFORTHREADS 200 - This apparently kicks in only when I reach my 
> > thread limit; sort of like a throttle.  I don't want it to be too 
> > long because this should only happen when I am hammered, but it is 
> > wise not
to
> > keep hammering when you are at 100%.  Sort of a mixed bag choice 
> > here.
> >
> >     WAITBETWEENTHREADS 100 - I see this setting as being the biggest 
> > issue with sizing a server.  Setting it at 100 ms means that I can 
> > only handle 10 messages per second, and this establishes an upper 
> > limit for
what
> > the server can do.   I currently average about 5 messages per second
coming
> > from my gateways at peak hours, so I figured that to be safe, I 
> > should double that value.
> >
> >     INVITEFIX ON - I have it on because it comes on by default and I 
> > don't know any better.  I know nothing about the cause for needing 
> > this outside of brief comments.  It seems strange that my Declude 
> > setup could ruin an invitation unless I was using footers.  If this 
> > is only
triggered by
> > footer use, I would like to know so that I could turn it off.  I 
> > would imagine that this causes extra load to do the check.
> >
> >     AUTOREVIEW ON - I have this on for the same reason that Andrew 
> > pointed out.  When I restart Decludeproc, messages land in my review
folder,
> > and I don't wish to keep manually fishing things out.  If there is 
> > an
issue
> > with looping, it would be wise for Declude to make this only trigger 
> > say every 15 minutes instead of more regularly.
> >
> >
> > Feel free to add to this if you want.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Colbeck, Andrew wrote:
> >
> >     I'd second that... on both the observed behaviour and the request 
> > for documentation.
> >
> >     I'm attaching my highly commented declude.cfg as a reasonable 
> > sample.
> >
> >     Andrew 8)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >             From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
> >             Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 10:36 AM
> >             To: [email protected]
> >             Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
> >
> >
> >             David,
> >
> >             That did the trick.  I can't even see any messages in my
proc 
> > folder any more.  I might suggest adding your explanation to the 
> > comments in the file just in case others feel the need to turn this 
> > on
like
> > I did.  I recalled the issues from the list and I turned it on 
> > because I didn't want the possibility of DNS crapping out and the 
> > leakage that
this
> > would cause.
> >
> >             Here's a screen cap of what my processor graph looks like
> > now:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >             Thanks,
> >
> >             Matt
> >
> >
> >
> >             David Barker wrote:
> >
> >                     The purpose of WINSOCKCLEANUP        ON is to reset
> > the winsock, what
> >                     happens when using this setting is that when the
> > \proc directory hit 0
> >                     decludeproc will finish processing all the messages
> > in the \work before
> >                     checking the \proc again. As WINSOCKCLEANUP is to be
used only by 
> > those who
> >                     experience DNS issues I would suggest running your
> > tests again with
> >                     WINSOCKCLEANUP commented out and see how the
> > behavior differs. Also having
> >                     the WAITFORMAIL to low can cause the CPU to process
> > very high as it is
> >                     constantly checking the \proc I would suggest a
> > minimum of 500-1000
> >
> >                     David B
> >                     www.declude.com
> >
> >                     -----Original Message-----
> >                     From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >                     [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Matt
> >                     Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 8:12 PM
> >                     To: [email protected]
> >                     Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Experience with 4.x
> >
> >                     Darrell,
> >
> >                     I put up two Windows Explorer windows side-by-side
> > under normal volume
> >                     and the pattern was consistent where the proc folder
grows while 
> > the
> >                     work folder shrinks until the work folder hits zero
> > at which point the
> >                     proc folder empties out and everything lands in work
> > and then the
> >                     pattern repeats with proc growing while work
> > shrinks.
> >
> >                     My settings are as follows:
> >
> >                     THREADS        50
> >                     WAITFORMAIL    100
> >                     WAITFORTHREADS        10
> >                     WAITBETWEENTHREADS    50
> >                     WINSOCKCLEANUP        ON
> >                     AUTOREVIEW        ON
> >                     INVITEFIX    ON
> >
> >                     Matt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                     Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >                                     It's a faulty design that leaves
> > more than half a server's CPU
> >                                     capacity unused due to the mere fact
> > that they wait for all threads
> >                                     to complete before moving in a new
> > batch.
> >
> >
> >                             I can't speak to what you see on your
> > server, but that is not how it
> >                             is running on my server.  I just double
> > checked again to make sure I
> >                             am not crazy, but as I watch the thread
> > count on my server
> >                             (decludeproc) the threads fluctuate between
> > 7 - 30 ( threads currently
> >                             set to 50).  It is not uncommon to see the
> > threads move as follow:
> >                             11,8,10,7,15,....  While I was watching it I
> > never seen a case where
> >                             it went down low enough for the WAITFORMAIL
> > setting to kick in.
> >                             Watching the proc/work directory you can see
> > files moving in and out,
> >                             but never really emptying out.  Its possible
> > what I am seeing is an
> >                             anomaly or maybe I am interpreting it wrong.
> >
> >                             Maybe David can comment on this.
> >
> >                             Darrell
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >                             invURIBL - Intelligent URI filtering plug-in
> > for Declude, mxGuard, and
> >                             ORF. Stop spam at the source the
> > spamvertised domain.  More effective
> >                             than traditional RBL's.  Try it today - 
> > http://www.invariantsystems.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".  The
> > archives can be found
> >                             at http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives
> > can be found
> >                     at http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives
> > can be found
> >                     at http://www.mail-archive.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". The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.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". The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.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". The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.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". The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives can be found at
> > http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives can be found
> > at http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives can be found
> at http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.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".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.

Reply via email to