Hi;
Some common observations about Declude not seeing emails:
- Last night I personally had 2 emails that were not seen by Declude and 4
were in the Admin mailbox. At least these are the ones that I have seen.
Of all of these none have the IMail spam headers.
- In our configuration we do all
Kami,
I believe that what you are getting at is a very likely explanation for
this. I had never seen this before the other day, and it seems that
most of the reports are coming from IMail 8 users who are using IMail to
run tests before Declude gets the message. I figure that my system's
John,
If I'm correct, you like Kami, are also using IMail 8 to pre-process
your E-mail? If so, that would explain the discrepancy. The longer the
window that the message sits in the original spool, the more likely the
queue will steal it or a copy of it.
Matt
John Tolmachoff (Lists)
Dave,
IMail delivered a copy to Declude that was deleted, but IMail also
delivered a copy directly to me without processing it with Declude.
There were two copies of this message as a result of the queue being run
at this particular instant in time. The copy that was delivered without
being
Dave Marchette wrote:
Gotcha. But do the headers of the copy that Imail delivered\stole have any
Declude markings in the header?
===
Hi again..
This is another one I just noticed.
Received: from 69.0.99.172.adsl.snet.net [69.0.99.172] by
what we need is %TESTWITHWEIGHT% intead of %TESTFAILEDWITHWEIGHTS%
so it will list test like ipnotinmx when they pass, and contribute to the
total weight, instead of when they fail.
you said i was coming in the next release, did you mean
%TESTFAILEDWITHWEIGHTS% ?
Correct.
The problem with
OK, I have an idea. Scott, can we disable HOLD1, and if so would that
affect HOLD2 operation?
99.5% of messages held by HOLD1 end up passing.
Yes -- if you set the HOLD1 threshold to be greater than the HOLD2
threshold, then only HOLD2 will apply.
I had never seen this before the other day, and it seems that
most of the reports are coming from IMail 8 users
Well, now that this discussion is in full swing I have seen this but
it was so rare that I didn't believe it. I remember researching one
incident for more than an hour and
- In our configuration we do all the IP4r tests in IMail and add header for
Declude to analyze. It is as if IMail never added the headers.. Since none
are there. Could it be that IMail somehow skips its own spam test? Should
we not expect if IMail has done all that it was to do the headers
I have tried this and it did not work. I already have IPNOTINMX and
NOLEGITCONTENT set up for this and they are not appearing in the
TESTFAILEDWITHWEIGHTS variable. I added my weight test to it and they
still appear. It is formatted as follows in my global.cfg
HIDETESTS IPNOTINMX
I thought I had the config set correctly to tag mail coming from a site.
Site addy is
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Its one where the host name constantly changes but the domain stays the
same.
I have entered in the senderfile.txt list
@.optinmaildomain.com
All Deculde sees is it failing the badheaders
FYI, I have a support incident open with Ipswitch on this issue and have
passed on others information posted here. Here is there response this
morning:
John, We're looking into it a bit further, I've passed the info to RD for
some further insight. Thanks for your patience.
John Tolmachoff
After upgrading to the latest beta, I noticed that all of my emails are
being tagged as failing this test. Is this how it should be?
---
[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,
There is no wildcard and certainly @ is not a wild card.
You need to use .optinmaildomain.com
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Rushing
Sent: Monday,
After upgrading to the latest beta, I noticed that all of my emails are
being tagged as failing this test. Is this how it should be?
Yes.
With the latest beta, you need to add a line
HIDETESTS CATCHALLMAILS IPNOTINMX NOLEGITCONTENT to the
\IMail\Declude\global.cfg file, and then those
Can STARTSWITH be used with MAILFROM?
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
---
[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
Can STARTSWITH be used with MAILFROM?
Yes.
-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers.
Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've
Yes, I'm running 1.77 beta. The exact line from my global.cfg is...
HIDETESTS IPNOTINMX NOLEGITCONTENT K-SPAM-ALL K-SPAM-VHIGH K-SPAM-HIGH K-SPAM-MED
K-SPAM-LOW
The K-SPAM- test are weight test for my Webmail junkmail filter I created. I use
Imail rules for customers to choose to send mail
Yes, I'm running 1.77 beta. The exact line from my global.cfg is...
HIDETESTS IPNOTINMX NOLEGITCONTENT K-SPAM-ALL K-SPAM-VHIGH K-SPAM-HIGH
K-SPAM-MED K-SPAM-LOW
The K-SPAM- test are weight test for my Webmail junkmail filter I
created. I use Imail rules for customers to choose to send mail
I was just checking out the archives and I came across someone with the same
problem as I but I wanted to see if there has been any additional work or
suggestions about it.
I want to blacklist some TLDs using Declude (Standard). Scott answered that
it's not reliable but offered a suggestion of
Why not use SMTP auth? I suppose this might be a problem is you aren't
using Imail 8.x(?)
Burzin
At 12:32 PM 12/7/2003, you wrote:
Scott, you have probably seen requests like this before, however, I think
this would be a great way to support most corporate and some ISP e-mail
domains with a
This has nothing to do with my users, it has everything to do with other
people trying to send mail to my hosted customers, which has nothing to do
with SMTP Auth.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Burzin Sumariwalla [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003
Scott,
I can already see how this will become a common thing to misunderstand
so I wanted to make a recommendation before people got too used to the
new functionality which shows the weights with the Warn action and
%TESTSFAILEDWITHWEIGHTS% variable (and possibly the logs also, but I
haven't
The issue is that the weight shown in the Warn and other actions only
reflects the weights assigned within the filter file itself and not the
weight from the Global.cfg file. Although most of my tests will probably
become internally weighted with the combination of END and MAXWEIGHT
Kami:
I've been working along similar lines but run into some difficulties. I did succeed in
getting a
group of managers and team leaders to suggest a list of good words which are often
used in
correspondence, and are now given negative weight. However, there is an occasional
nightmare
group of managers and team leaders to suggest a list of good words which
are often used in correspondence,
Hi Keith:
Actually I think what Bill was originally talking about and what I was
trying to say was a way to actually credit good servers.
Lets say..
- No blacklists
- Valid REVDNS
- Valid
It may be confusing for some.
but why not add a second variable and leave to the administrator the choice
of using it or not.
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
And to state the obvious...
Giving negative weights to combinations of good server configurations
would benefit correspondence from legitimate mail servers that would
otherwise get tagged as spam by false positives on content filters, e.g. a
joke e-mail with bad words or a newsletter with URLs
Is anyone using the END statement in filters successfully? I am finding on my server
that if I have an END anywhere in a filter it always ends, whether it matches that
statement or not. I have tried this on several filters just to test and get the same
results on all of them. I tried in the
I reported experiencing the same thing last week with using the END flag,
but that was while using the final interim release (I have not tested with
the v1.77 beta yet). I found that even if none of the END lines matched,
but other lines in the file did match, END causes Declude to skip the
Bill Daniel,
I'm running the 1.77 Beta with 8.04 have the same problem.
George
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Landry
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 8:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] END
Just wanted to say thanks!
Matt
R. Scott Perry wrote:
The issue is that the weight shown in the Warn and other actions only
reflects the weights assigned within the filter file itself and not
the weight from the Global.cfg file. Although most of my tests will
probably become internally
32 matches
Mail list logo
