Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spoolviewer.exe - bug?

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
Does spoolviewer.exe look at the registry to determine the actual spool location? The original release had a bug in it where it would look up the location in the registry, but not actually use it. If you download it again (from http://www.declude.com/tools ), it should start working properly.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Some Help needed on a couple of things

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
IN the log files I am seeing this: 07/09/2003 20:21:41 Qbf9a3efa012ca2d1 Msg failed BLACKLISTIP ( This is a spam IP address). Action=IGNORE. 07/09/2003 20:21:41 Qbf9a3efa012ca2d1 Msg failed BLACKLISTDOMAIN (Message failed BLACKLISTDOMAIN test (79)). Action=IGNORE. This means that the test is

[Declude.JunkMail] IPBYPASS IP range

2003-07-10 Thread Markus Gufler
Hi Scott it's possible to set something like the following? IPBYPASS123.123.123. Two big local ISPs are listed now for over a week in a lot of RBLs and we have FPs because they trigger some ip4r tests. At the moment I'm whitelisting singel IP's but it seems they have more then 20

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IPBYPASS IP range

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
it's possible to set something like the following? IPBYPASS123.123.123. No -- the IPBYPASS option only works with a single IP. Two big local ISPs are listed now for over a week in a lot of RBLs and we have FPs because they trigger some ip4r tests. At the moment I'm whitelisting singel IP's

[Declude.JunkMail] empty body

2003-07-10 Thread Markus Gufler
Anyone else has seen in the past days spam messages with absolutely no body? Below is the header from one of this messages. Note: A.) the subject line with spacers and id-code B.) the from name ;-) What a sense can have such mailings? Markus = Received:

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam Attack

2003-07-10 Thread IS - Systems Eng. (Karl Drugge)
While I haven't seen this particular type of attack, I do have one client that is seeing something very similar. He is getting mail-bombed from numerous spam sites/IP's.. he is rejecting over 300 an hour, and this is for a site with only a 512k connection and 50 users... It's been happening for

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] empty body

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
Anyone else has seen in the past days spam messages with absolutely no body? Below is the header from one of this messages. Note: A.) the subject line with spacers and id-code B.) the from name ;-) What a sense can have such mailings? I'm guessing that it is broken spamware, that just isn't

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPBYPASS IP range

2003-07-10 Thread Markus Gufler
In this case, you could use: WHITELIST IP 123.123.123.0/24 This would whitelist the entire range from 123.123.123.0 through 123.123.123.255. Ok done. But this will whitelist generally all messages comming from this Ips. Using IPBYPASS will disable only the DNS-based tests

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPBYPASS IP range

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
In this case, you could use: WHITELIST IP 123.123.123.0/24 This would whitelist the entire range from 123.123.123.0 through 123.123.123.255. Ok done. But this will whitelist generally all messages comming from this Ips. That is correct. Using IPBYPASS will disable only the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] X-Declude-Sender Missing from Header

2003-07-10 Thread JR Tatum
Scott, These are our configuration settings: #XINHEADER X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. XINHEADER X-Note: Total spam weight of this E-mail is %WEIGHT%. #XINHEADER X-Spam-Tests-Failed: %TESTSFAILED% [%WEIGHT%] #XINHEADER

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] X-Declude-Sender Missing from Header

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
These are our configuration settings: XSENDER ON That should cause the X-Declude-Sender: header to appear in the headers of all E-mails. Have you checked to see if there are any C:\Declude.gp1 or C:\Declude.gp2 files? Is there any pattern to the E-mails without that header (all

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] empty body

2003-07-10 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
I have been seeing a couple a week. John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:00 AM To:

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] empty body

2003-07-10 Thread Kami Razvan
I have seen many... I think the spammers are in a database cleaning season. They are perhaps confirming the emails. We have seen subjects like: - Hey - What do you think? - The next revision.. But with empty bodies and from emails that are definitely spam. Regards, Kami -Original

[Declude.JunkMail] Compatability

2003-07-10 Thread Terry Parks
Does anyone know if Declude works with other email server software besides Imail? Terry --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Surfside Internet] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Compatability

2003-07-10 Thread Bill Landry
It does not, it is an IMail exclusive. :-( Bill - Original Message - From: Terry Parks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Declude. JunkMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 9:28 AM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Compatability Does anyone know if Declude works with other email server

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] X-Declude-Sender Missing from Header

2003-07-10 Thread JR Tatum
So far we are getting reports from only a single user. A quick review of the current spool shows no email without the X-Declude-Sender line. There are no gp1 or gp2 files on the server. Do you think it is some setting in the user's mail client (Outlook 2002) which is stripping out some of the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] X-Declude-Sender Missing from Header

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
So far we are getting reports from only a single user. A quick review of the current spool shows no email without the X-Declude-Sender line. There are no gp1 or gp2 files on the server. Do you think it is some setting in the user's mail client (Outlook 2002) which is stripping out some of the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Compatability

2003-07-10 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
However, depending on your needs, you could set up a Imail Store and Forward Gateway or use the Gateway services of some one running Imail and Declude. John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[Declude.JunkMail] re: Spam Statistics

2003-07-10 Thread Kevin Bilbee
I thought the group might want to see som spam stats. These are our stats from yesterday. Does any one else have stats they could post so we can get an idea of what test get triggered - LogFile(s) Scanned: D:\IMAIL\spool\dec0709.log

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] re: Spam Statistics

2003-07-10 Thread Susan Duncan
What is everyone using to get statistics? -- Susan Duncan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) TEL:(613) 231-SIRC x225 IT Director, SIRC FAX:(613) 231-3739 http://www.sportquest.com/ http://www.canadiansport.com/ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- [This E-mail was

[Declude.JunkMail] re: Badheaders

2003-07-10 Thread Kevin Bilbee
I have been going through email caught by the BADHEADERS test and most all of the m are due to the year. I am guessing because it sais 03 instead of 2003. I would assume this problem is due to the mail client or SPAM software not being Y2K compliant. Kevin Bilbee Network Administrator Standard

[Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread Glenn Brooks
I hate to continue to ask for assistance for the same problem, but I just can not figure it out. I lost a 300.00/month hosting account today due to continued spam getting through. Here is what I have: I have multiple domains. Only a couple run with their own directory within the Declude

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] re: Badheaders

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have been going through email caught by the BADHEADERS test and most all of the m are due to the year. I am guessing because it sais 03 instead of 2003. I would assume this problem is due to the mail client or SPAM software not being Y2K compliant. That is correct. Those E-mails are coming

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread Rifat Levis
Hello Glenn , Here is what i am doing to get rid of this kind of spammers. In my global.cfg i create AtlasfilterfilterE:\IMail\Declude\atlasfilter.txt x 0 0 i create a file atlasfilter.txt in declude folder In the config file i have WEIGHT10 weight x x 10 0 WEIGHT15 weight x x

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
In the Global.cfg file I have a line of code like thes: BLACKLISTDOMAIN filter E:\IMail\Declude\domainblacklist.txt x 20 0: I do not have any other line of code associated with this test in the globla.cfg file. That will add a weight of 20 to any E-mail that meets the criteria of the filter,

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread Glenn Brooks
Then in my junkmail file I have the following line of code: BLACKLISTDOMAIN DELETE The questions here include: [1] Is that junkmail file the one being used for E-mail to the domain in question (IE do you have any per-user or per-domain configurations)? Yes this file is used for the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
I will have to watch for thisthe thing I noticed last night and today was the following in the declude log files, but am not sure they were for these exact emails, but I have this continually in the declude log files. 07/10/2003 20:11:42 Q0eb9c314012eb215 Msg failed BLACKLISTIP ( This is a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread Glenn Brooks
Write in the atlasfilter.txt helo 20 contains ommo.net helo 20 contains 212.64.200.32 I will adjust mine to match this and give it a try Can I use the following for IPs helo 20 contains 212.64.200.0/24 to cover more IP addresses? Thanks for the suggestions... gb --- [This E-mail was

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Lost One Account - Help Please

2003-07-10 Thread Glenn Brooks
that is a great suggestion ..looks like you configuration is working so far...and setting the log to mid helps sort out the log files.when at low it showed the test ignored, while looking at it at MID set, it shows ignore and then further down the log it deletes after finishing all