Re: [Declude.JunkMail] NRECIPS variable

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have an custom external test that gets passed the %NRECIPS% variable. The test is never seeing a value for NRECIPS greater than 99. Is there something in the Declude code limiting this value to 99? In some places in Declude JunkMail there is a limit of 100 recipients, which is the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Newbie here, how to send msg from holder mailbox to recipient?

2003-02-06 Thread John Tolmachoff
How do I go about doing this, while trying to keep the header intact so that the user sees the msg as if it was never intercepted? I avoid that by using HOLD instead of ROUTETO and then using Spam Review to check the message. If it is legit, simple place it back in the queue. John Tolmachoff

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spews is incompetent (well, overzealous at least)

2003-02-06 Thread Mark Smith
Here Here! I'm not defending them at all but they really should use something other then that kiddy farm newsgroup to communicate with. I really think that's half of their perception problem. Of course their guerilla tactics don't help! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] NRECIPS variable

2003-02-06 Thread Bill B.
Is there a way I can get access to the real number of recipients even if it is over 100 (without parsing the Q*.SMD file)? Perhaps a new variable %NTOTALRECIPS% ? -Original Message- From: R. Scott Perry Sent: Thu, 06 Feb 2003 08:11:50 -0500 Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] NRECIPS

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Filter on Body question

2003-02-06 Thread paul
Scott, What about if you have SUBJECT 5 CONTAINS LINKS also? With that count twice? I ask cause I haven't seperated them yet as SUBJECT, HEADERS, BODY so will it fail the SUBJECT if it has links in the subject, and BODY if the body has links in it? Or does it stop when it fails whichever is

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] NRECIPS variable

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is there a way I can get access to the real number of recipients even if it is over 100 (without parsing the Q*.SMD file)? Perhaps a new variable %NTOTALRECIPS% ? In the next release, %NRECIPS% will reflect the actual number of recipients, without the limit of 100 being imposed.

[Declude.JunkMail] New spam propagation

2003-02-06 Thread John Tolmachoff
Lately, one of our clients has been getting adult spam every day that passes all tests except SPAMHEADERS and SPAMCHECK with a SPAMCHECK weight of 6, so it passes. Looking through the source code in the body, the only pattern I found was that the example name changed every day but was

[Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread Philip Butler
Is there a way to bounce messages based on the failure of multiple tests? Philip Butler Internal Systems Engineer Region VI ESC phone 936.435.2503 fax 936.295.1447 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is there a way to bounce messages based on the failure of multiple tests? You can, using the weighting system. However, it is NOT RECOMMENDED. Bouncing E-mail should *ONLY* been done when there is a very good chance that it is legitimate mail (which is why bouncing should rarely be used --

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread Sheldon Koehler
99% of spam is sent with bogus return addresses, you just end up making the spam problem worse. For example, if you receive 1,000 spams a day that are caught (held) with the WEIGHT20 test, and then today change that action to bounce the E-mail, you are increasing spam worldwide by 1,000 spams

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
99% of spam is sent with bogus return addresses, you just end up making the spam problem worse. For example, if you receive 1,000 spams a day that are caught (held) with the WEIGHT20 test, and then today change that action to bounce the E-mail, you are increasing spam worldwide by 1,000

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread Sheldon Koehler
Imagine if a spammer sends out 1,000,000 E-mails with *YOUR* return address. How are you going to feel about the company or ISP that bounces that spam to you? I have adjusted my weights enough that the real spam does get trashed for the most part. But the bounce messages help me know about

[Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread David Sullivan
I have a user that I need to deliver 1000 held spam messages to. The user is on a Store and Forward domain. If I just copy the Q/D's back into the spool folder will not Declude Pro just stop them again? I assume I need to temporarily add a Whitelist To. Do I do this in global.cfg for this user

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.67 (beta) released

2003-02-06 Thread Helpdesk
on 2/4/03 1:23 PM, R. Scott Perry wrote: Would it be possible to change the format to this? COMMENTS comments 5 x 10 0 COMMENTS comments 5 weight 10 0 Where the number is the minimum needed to fail the test. The second value indicates whether or not the admin wants a cumulative

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread John Tolmachoff
They only get scanned once, so copy away. John Tolmachoff MCSE, CSSA IT Manager, Network Engineer RelianceSoft, Inc. Fullerton, CA 92835 www.reliancesoft.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Sullivan Sent:

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread David Sullivan
They only get scanned once, so copy away. So even with Pro, all I need to do is drop them back in the Spool folder and they'll get automatically delivered? This worked with Standard but I thought we ran into a problem when we tried this with Pro since it does outbound filtering as well.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have a user that I need to deliver 1000 held spam messages to. The user is on a Store and Forward domain. If I just copy the Q/D's back into the spool folder will not Declude Pro just stop them again? No, it will not -- Declude will automatically ignore any E-mail that has already been

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.67 (beta) released

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
Would it be possible to change the format to this? COMMENTS comments 5 x 10 0 COMMENTS comments 5 weight 10 0 Where the number is the minimum needed to fail the test. The second value indicates whether or not the admin wants a cumulative weight. The third and forth values indicate

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread David Sullivan
No, it will not -- Declude will automatically ignore any E-mail that has already been scanned. Does it look at headers and not re-scan or is Declude called in the process before Imail writes the Q file? David --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist TO

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
No, it will not -- Declude will automatically ignore any E-mail that has already been scanned. Does it look at headers and not re-scan or is Declude called in the process before Imail writes the Q file? Neither, actually. :) When an E-mail arrives, IMail places it in the spool directory,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Analyzer - Comments Needed

2003-02-06 Thread Keith Johnson
Darrell, That is awesome. I get those same requests from our clients weekly. I appreciate your time in writing it. Keith -Original Message- From: Darrell L. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Analyzer - Comments Needed

2003-02-06 Thread Sheldon Koehler
However, I was looking for features that people would like that I may not have thought of at this point. Things Still to be added 1.) Ability to email the reports Darrell, I like your list so far. Can the email be a small summary and how hard would it be to have a web page for the detailed

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread Philip Butler
That makes sense. So if I just want to HOLD or DELETE it, is there a good reference document that I can look at which will demonstrate how to use the weighted system to respond to messages which fail multiple tests? Philip Butler Internal Systems Engineer Region VI ESC phone 936.435.2503 fax

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Action for Multiple Tests

2003-02-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
That makes sense. So if I just want to HOLD or DELETE it, is there a good reference document that I can look at which will demonstrate how to use the weighted system to respond to messages which fail multiple tests? What are you looking to do? The weighting system works by assigning a spam

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] New Tests?

2003-02-06 Thread Sanford Whiteman
CYBERsitter, now known as SpamManager, is being beta tested by a number of us with excellent results. It is coming close to being released. Some information may be found here, www.spammanager.com. Hey, SPAManager's my trademark! No fair! :)) -Sandy

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Newbie here, how to send msg from holder mailbox to recipient?

2003-02-06 Thread Keith Johnson
Steve, If I am not mistaken (Scott can correct me), since Declude has already looked at it once, you can forward this to the intended user and it won't get scanned again by JunkMail. Keith -Original Message- From: Steve Jensen [mailto:[EMAIL

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spews is incompetent (well, overzealous at least)

2003-02-06 Thread Phillip B. Holmes
Mark, I may be off base here, but I am almost positive that spews.org offers no way of communicating with people. There is no way to contact them. Regards, Phillip B. Holmes Media Resolutions Inc. Macromedia Alliance Partner http://www.mediares.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1-888-395-4678 972-889-0201

[Declude.JunkMail] newbie progress

2003-02-06 Thread Steve Jensen
the HOLD command did the trick. Keith, I didn't understand your suggestion. If i run declude, and it does a HOLD on a particular msg that turns out to be legit, it still requires my intervention. I go in the spam dir, look at the msg, see it's legit and dragndrop to the spool dir. Is there a way

[Declude.JunkMail] Error in Declude log file

2003-02-06 Thread Marc Catuogno
This is what Im getting in my Declude log: 02/07/2003 02:00:05 Warning: misconfiguration in following line in global.cfg file (ip4r is not an ACTION) 02/07/2003 02:00:05 DSBL ip4r list.dsbl.org * 6 0 This is the line in my global.cfg file that I copied and pasted from the latest