FYI, from Steve Linford of spamhaus:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/news.admin.net-abuse.email/msg/2d050ab220faf931
http://www.spamhaus.org/zen/
Bill
David Sullivan wrote the following on 11/15/2006 12:58 PM -0800:
Does anyone have the proper setup in Declude to query
There are a few e-mail encryption services out
there (e.g, see Sigaba Zix, among others). We provide an
encrypted e-mail service for our healthcare customers that encrypts messages,
not only in transport, but while stored in their mailboxes, as well. We
also provide a TLS/SSL gateway server
David, how does one go about finding and downloading v3.1.1 for Declude? I
don't see it available for download on my download page at the Declude web
site.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: David Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: declude.virus@declude.com; declude.junkmail@declude.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill
Landry
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 2:42 PM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 4.3.7 3.1.1 Released
David, how does one go about finding and downloading v3.1.1 for Declude?
I
PROTECTED]
To: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: scam database
Hi Bill,
Just to let you know I've done a big update to the scam database,
which isn't publicily known about yet but
it's working a treat this end, with a lot of those image spams
PROTECTED]
To: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: scam database
Hi Bill,
Just to let you know I've done a big update to the scam database,
which isn't publicily known about yet but
it's working a treat this end, with a lot of those image spams
Steve's request atthe end of
this message about scripting the downloads for the new scam.ndb,at least
for now...Thanks,Bill- Original Message -From:
"Steve Basford" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To:
"Bill Landry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent:
Monday, August 07, 2006 12:51 PMSubject:
Sound like Cloudmark (http://www.cloudmark.com/) and their free Razor
service (http://razor.sourceforge.net/), which I have already been using
successfully for a few years now.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: David Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent:
to
pricey and convoluted options like CommTouch. Had Declude queried its
customer base before getting in bed with CommTouch, they might have come up
with some better/cheaper/more acceptable solutions...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: declude.junkmail
then Declude
looking at building in support to these various spam checksum services -
send the query in the correct format, and properly interpret the returned
response.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Sanford Whiteman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bill Landry declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent
do, so I'll admit that I could be wrong...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Sanford Whiteman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bill Landry declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:47 PM
Subject: Re[4]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 - Commtouch trial ?
Just as SA
I thought this was due to a glitch in the transition from IMail to
SmarterMail at Declude.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Sanford Whiteman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: David Barker declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 1:49 PM
Subject: Re[6]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude
David, it looks like Declude needs to update its SPF record as posts from
the list are failing both:
SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL
SPF_SOFTFAIL
DNSStuff is showing softfail for your mail delivery host IP address, as
well:
http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/spf.ch?server=declude.comip=63.246.31.248
Bill
-
From: Sanford Whiteman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Bill Landry declude.junkmail@declude.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 3:13 PM
Subject: Re[6]: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 4.3 - Commtouch trial ?
Razor has always been free, even during that very short timeframe
of like 6 months where
Thanks Nick, I forgot to mention that on the list a few weeks ago when this
change was made. Here is a simple download script I use on my Fedora
servers that I run via an hourly cron job. It checks to see if there are
any changes to the file and only downloads if there are changes:
You might also want to look at using the SARE rules at
http://www.rulesemporium.com/rules.htm, particularly the SARE Stock rules
(70_sare_stocks.cf). Also, a couple of Fred's rule sets at
http://www.rulesemporium.com/other-rules.htm (88_FVGT_rawbody.cf
99_FVGT_meta.cf) can be quite helpful,
PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] image spam
Thanks Bill. I have been using the SARE stock rules but the
others I was unaware of - as well as the update script!
-Nick
Bill Landry wrote:
You might also want to look at using the SARE rules at
http
We have been seeing these for several weeks now, and SA's bayes
implementation handles it quite well. This from the Matt Kettler on the SA
list:
==
How well bayes poison works depends a lot on your bayes implementation.
Some
bayes implementations are fairly susceptible to this. (I
Gary, you should upgrade to 3.0.6, which has been out for about a week now,
as 3.0.5.26 had serious problems with handling certain kinds of mime
encapsulate messages. We actually had to roll back to 3.0.5.23 after
reporting the issues with 3.0.5.26 to Declude. Version 3.0.6 fixed this
issue.
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You do need the Pro version to run more than one scanner.
It's the best thing about Virus Pro...
Also nice if you get a set of bad definitions or a scanner stops working,
the other scanners will cover.
With PRESCAN ON, Mcafee
(and Ebay) Phising Filters
Aaarrgg.
Good catch Bill.
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 12:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Banks (and Ebay) Phising Filters
- Original Message
Didn't get any notification here either.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Changes @ Declude
Barry,
I didn't get the E-mail that you mentioned.
I'm also
I notice on the Declude web site that Declude 4.0.8 is available for
download. I don't recall seeing any announcement of a new version, so
what's new or changed in the 4.0 version?
Bill
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA www.declude.com]
---
This E-mail came from the
I wouldn't recommend removing the /PACKED switch. Here are the switches I
have been using on both of our IMail/Declude/F-Prot servers for the past
couple of years without issue:
C:\Progra~1\FSI\F-Prot\fpcmd.exe -AI -ARCHIVE=5 -DUMB -NOBOOT -NOBREAK -NOMEM
-PACKED -SAFEREMOVE -SERVER -SILENT
Don't know if you would want to use them, even if
they were available, as the writer was high on life and drunk with enthusiasm
most of the time while concocting them... ;-)
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
Evans Martin
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent:
I think you've got it backwards, SBC acquired ATT but is keeping the ATT
name.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: John T (Lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Earthlink/prodigy
And since ATT now
We are running Declude Version 3.0.5.23 with JunkMail and Virus Pro on two
dual-proc servers and are not seeing this. I often see the CPU at zero when
no mail is being processes.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: David Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Matt Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
You can. Simply add a line to your hosts file on your current mail server
like:
ip.of.gate.waycomcast.com
Then all mail destine for comcast.com will get sent directly to the gateway
server and all other mail will still get delivered as usual.
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
I doubt that the problems experienced by the
Declude licensing server had anything to do with your DNS tests failing. I
have been running version 3.0.5.22 since it was released and experienced no
problems over the weekend, including DNS based tests.
Bill
- Original Message -
What version of decludeproc are your running?
decludeproc -v
Sounds like an old issue that has been resolved in more recent releases.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Harry Vanderzand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 9:30 AM
It's not necessary to stop/start any IMail services, since IMail calls
declude.exe (not decludeproc.exe), and all declude.exe does is move the
queue files from the spool directory to the proc directory. Decludeproc
checks the proc directory at whatever time interval you have set in you
Take a look at SpamAssassin or the SA plug-in for Declude.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Dave Beckstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 8:56 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Cryptic URL in source
David,
Could I suggest that you
Mike, you cannot simply execute the Decludeproc30xxx.exe file to do the
decludeproc upgrade, you need to stop the decludeproc service, delete the
old decludeproc.exe file, then rename the Decludeproc30xxx.exe to
decludeproc.exe and then restart the service.
Bill
- Original Message -
I sent info to Declude support yesterday about this, but have not received a
response yet. I also had to revert back to V3.0.5.12 yesterday because of
this issue.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: David Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, November
ON for 3.0.5.14
David B
www.declude.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Landry
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 1:18 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] V3.05.14 issue
I sent info to Declude support yesterday
] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Landry
Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 12:53 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] V3.05.14 issue
David, I made the suggested change to my declude.cfg and within 3 minutes
the orphaned .vir directories started
I've tested the upgrade to Declude 3.0.5.9 on a test server and noted a
couple of minor issues. First, Decludeproc -v shows:
Declude Version 3.0.5.9
However, decludeproc -diag shows:
Invalid command line parameter:
-install Install Declude
-diagPrint diagnostics
Ditto, since we run dual-proc IMail servers, as well. What are the current
declude.cfg entries and recommended settings. Are all of the documented
issues now resolved?
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Wednesday, October
- Original Message -
From: John T (Lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am looking for a way to edit a text file through command line for use in
batch files, generally doing search and replace.
If any one has suggestions, please let me know.
Sed works well for this type of function:
sed
- Original Message -
From:
Goran
Jovanovic
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 2:10
PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam
box
I have a question
about these boxes that go in front of Declude, be they IMGATE or ORF or
- Original Message -
From:
Matt
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 3:18
PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam
box
One other note to add to this.ORF plugs-into MS SMTP. I
have unfortunately found that MS SMTP doesn't appear
- Original Message -
From: Chuck Cahill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The destination client is a Financial Organization who handles our
electronic billing. They are complaining that the X-Mailer: header is
causing a routing issue with their automation software and want us to
remove it.
Chuck,
- Original Message -
From: Adam Hobach [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
Does anyone have a way to automatically delete emails that have MX/mail
records that point to 127.0.0.1? The email is currently in a loop on our
mail server then eventually fails. The link below is an example domain
- Original Message -
From: NIck Hayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I do not think this will work. The imail headers are added after declude
sees the email
Actually, some IMail spam tests run before being passed to Declude and some
after. The JunkMail archives will contain the gory details.
- Original Message -
From: NIck Hayer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Landry wrote:
Actually, some IMail spam tests run before being passed to Declude and
some after. The JunkMail archives will contain the gory details.
Bill
correct William - but the headers are after. I already tried
- Original Message -
From: Spaminator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill, thanks-- this helps a lot.
The imail statistics test was one I wanted to capture with declude,
but mostly I'm looking for the phrase and URL tests (which we've
spent years tweaking extensively). So, this is good news
- Original Message -
From: Michael L. Hardrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ipswitch IMail Server Multiple Unspecified Vulnerabilities
http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/13727?ref=rss
Though they don't report it, I'm assuming that 8.15 with HF2 is not
vulnerable either, since the HF2 patches
I see three instances of "Using [im.decludekey.us]" every time
I run the "declude -diag" command on my two IMail/Declude servers. I use
the following setting in my declude.cfg files:
DNS xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
because I don't use the same DNS setting
for Declude as I have configure in IMail. I
Here's another one:
http://mailscanner.prolocation.net/german.cf
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Markus Gufler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2005 9:07 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] German political spam
The direct link for spamassassins
- Original Message -
From: Joey Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can someone please explain to me why, if an email is flagged as spam by
Sniffer, I shouldn't just delete it outright? Are there instances where
Sniffer is wrong? Or is this the way you all use it already?
Reason I ask is that
- Original Message -
From: Evans Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I wish to move my Declude log file out of the Imail\Spool directory and to
a
directory called \Program Files\SyslogD\Logs. However, when I set LOGFILE
to c:\Program Files\SyslogD\Logs\dec.log, I get a log file in the root
Yep, Declude really dropped the ball with their lack of URIBL support in
their latest release.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 11:24 AM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail 8.2 Beta
Don't know
All this and more is available via SpamAssassin. You may want to look at
Sandy's SA plug-in to Declude, or possibly look at setting up SA on a
Linux/Postfix/Amavisd-New/Sniffer gateway.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Darin Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent:
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is any one seeing Google and or Earthlink failing the subjectchars test on
blank subject lines or even if there is a subject typed in ?
Any one know of a reason for this.
This was a know bug that I think has been fixed with the latest
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was just playing with this today - I'm not sure I'd put much faith in
surbl.org. The first two messages I saw it tag in my own inbox, were
very legitimate. In fact, one of them was from Wells Fargo (*really*
from Wells Fargo,
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
My fault for mixing up names in this case. I was thinking about the
combined URIBL zone and not your version of the checker. The issue that
I was really intending to speak to was the combined zone
(multi.surbl.org) that some people
My read is that he is only attempting to enforce the subject requirement on
his on users within his own domain. So if he builds his rules
appropriately, either as a specific domain rule or a combo filter, he should
be able to apply the subject requirement to his own users/domain without
affecting
I agree with your comments, Matt. The other thing that has frustrated me is
the fact that a bug will be fixed in an interim release and no mention of it
will be made on the list until someone else complains about the problem on
the list. Then there would come a response, oh, that was fixed two
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Using Declude 1.79i7.
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent an email direct to Scott
and Barry.
Why run the test at all if you're going to set the weight to zero anyway -
just comment out the test until it's fixed.
I can see this causing
- Original Message -
From: Richard Lanard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've been thinking about the Sniffer, but i had a few questions:
Do i have to have Pro to run it, i.e. external tests?
and How effective is it against Phishing?
or would it be better to add Mcafee and Clam
Nice to know that Declude is listening to our requests.
Thanks Ralph!
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Ralph Krausse
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 10:57 AM
Subject: Declude 2.0b Install
Hello
Bill,
I wanted to let
you know that I was monitoring the
- Original Message -
From: Glen Harvy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Is anyone using mailpolice and if so what details are required in the
global.cfg file?
See http://rhs.mailpolice.com/usage.php. Here is an example of how to setup
the MailPolice Block list as an RHSBL type test in the
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can also use their rev dns list:
MAILPOLICE-REVDNS dnsbl %REVDNS%.dynamic.rhs.mailpolice.com 127.0.0.2 50
0
Hmmm, do you actually catch anything with this test? And why would you go
through the trouble of setting it this
using it.
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] mailpolice
- Original Message -
From: Scott
- Original Message -
From: William Stillwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Umm, Wouldn't the 0 9 setting put a Positive weight on a good clean email?
shouldn't it be like
SNIFFER external nonzero c:\sniffer\win32\licenseid.exe authcode 7 -7
which would put a Positive 7 on a nonzero return,
Markus, if you want to test against all of the SURBLs, since
it's only a single query to the multi zone, use:
SURBL_PH rhsbl ph.surbl.org127.0.0.2 1 0
SURBL_SC rhsbl sc.surbl.org127.0.0.2 1 0
SURBL_WS rhsbl ws.surbl.org127.0.0.2 1 0
Which will require six different queries if you want to use all SURBL lists.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent
Hi Bill,You seem to always be one of the first to share
new blacklists. Where doyou find this info? Is there another
list that would be worth joining?Thanks,
man.Darin.- Original Message - From: "Bill
Landry" [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent:
Tuesday, N
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher
I don't believe the Jon Wein and the Phish are testable on their own. I
haven't received an hits on jp.surbl.org.
Yep, that does appear to be the case for the JP list - it was the last list
added to SURBL, and since it was added after the
- Original
Message - From: "Bill Landry" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 5:04 AM Subject: Re:
[Declude.JunkMail] SURBL as RHSBL Modification, since
I was not thinking, but Declude JunkMail does not support bitmasked
responses.
Folks, apparently the PH and JP lists were never setup as
separate SURBL zones, so I would recommend not querying those lists as you will
never get a response from them until Declude JunkMail supports bitmasked
responses.
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
Markus Gufler
Hmmm, that could possibly render some decent results if spammers use the
same domain in the MAIL FROM: address in the SMTP envelope as they us in
the URI listed in the body of the message. How are the results stacking up
against your other RHSBL tests?
Bill
- Original Message -
From:
- Original Message -
From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
i set the following filter to collect spam messages that are not caught by
sniffer
not working
does the testfailed work on weight test ?
If not, how to change the filter to do what I need ?
TESTFAILED END CONTAINS SNIFFER
- Original Message -
From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
what i am trying is to copy these messages to a mailbox for further review
to help me understand and fine tune my weighing, with the message still
going to the final recipient.
First, the TESTSFAILED location parameter is supported
- Original Message -
From: Jeff Kratka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Has anyone had better luck with habeas lately. I turned things off since
the
spammers jumped on.
Don't use the Declude JunkMail habeas whitelist feature:
WHITELIST HABEAS
nor
HABEAS habeas x x -3 0
the watermark
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Habeas by itself was useless. A trivial amount of spammers using it.
I turned Habeas-HIL off... Too few responses to be useful. Twice in the
last
year they were false positiving on AOL, so when I was using it, their
weight
- Original Message -
From: Nick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A little SpamAssassin help please -
It does, but it can also be used with Declude as an RHSBL now:
MAILPOLICE-FRAUDfraud.rhs.mailpolice.com 127.0.0.230
to see if I have this correct for SA 3x
In my local.cf
I should have clarified, the example I give below is for SA 3.0.1, since
they changed the action from header to the more appropriate body setting
between SA 3.0.0 3.0.1. So, you have it correct if you are using anything
before 3.0.1.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Nick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How do you handle if a particular rhsbl returns multiple return codes
like 127.0.0 2; 127.0.0 4, etc and you want to pick which one to use -
is it:
urirhsbl URIBL_EX multiple.example.com. A 127.0.0.4
or
urirhssub URIBL_EX
It does, but it can also be used with Declude as an RHSBL now:
MAILPOLICE-FRAUDfraud.rhs.mailpolice.com 127.0.0.230
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
Server Resource Kit. So I've got two scripts that parse the date and pull
down the correct decMMDD.log (or sysMMDD.txt) for today, and another for
yesterday. They're called Today and Yesterday :)
Enjoy!
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: Bill Landry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
- Original Message -
From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Here is a line that will give me all sessions from a user:
grep MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] D:\log1104.txt | gawk {print $5} |
uniq
test.txt
Now how do I use a pipe or a batch file to get all the lines for all these
sessions in
- Original Message -
From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, i may not expressed myself
I need to
grep %variable% ...
Where the variable takes all the values generated by the first grep:
grep MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] D:\log1104.txt | gawk {print $5} |
uniq
Should i use some kind
- Original Message -
From: Serge [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, i may not expressed myself
I need to
grep %variable% ...
Where the variable takes all the values generated by the first grep:
grep MAIL FROM:[EMAIL PROTECTED] D:\log1104.txt | gawk {print $5} |
uniq
Should i use some kind
- Original Message -
From: DLAnalyzer Support [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those are both great tools. My only complaint with BareTail is I get a
lot
of flicker under TS. However, their older wintail has no flicker...
Try the grep and tail tools included with the GNU Win32 UNIX utilities
- Original Message -
From: Colbeck, Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On various domains I administer, a single point of failure mailhost has
been
good enough, but I'm shortly going to add a second host on a second
network
for redundancy.
Now, I understand *how* to do that, but what I would
- Original Message -
From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I constantly use this batch file to find in the Declude logs.
I change the V_logday to the day of the log to search
and the V_find to the term to find. (It's usual a specific mail id
(Q7172144401ba4a6b or such) and I'll get all
- Original Message -
From: Michael Graveen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott,
What does the line Invalid WHITELIST type: AUTH?
I thought WHITELIST AUTH allowed me to white list my users that
authenticate.
You're correct, that's what it does. But like Scott said, you have to be
running
- Original Message -
From: Mark E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a way to have a filter run for only one domain you're hosting?
I'm running Junkmail Pro
Sure, create a subdirectory under the Declude directory with the domain name
(e.g., example.com) and place a $default$.junkmail
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
SURBL has a list of TLD's that they use in creating their list. IMO,
this
should be quite easy to provide, and if you don't intend to just say the
word and someone here will I'm sure gladly offer up their own.
I'm just
Yes, but why would you want to? Most postmaster messages and bounce
notifications come from null. But if you must, and you are running the Pro
version of JM, in a filter file use:
MAILFROM 50 IS
However, it's not recommended...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Cody Wilson [EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Mark E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I recently added Roger Eriksson's SURBL filter and was wondering if anyone
was using this to also pull the other SURBL lists at http://www.surbl.org/
Currently Roger's script only uses the sc.surbl.org.rbldnsd list.
- Original Message -
From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott, is support for URIBLs even on the JunkMail development schedule?
It's something that we looked into. But there was some sort of major
issue
supporting it, which I believe had to do with third-level domains (such as
Please excuse the wrong terminology usage, I meant the TLDs are extracted
not whitelisted.
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] SURBL Lists.
- Original Message
- Original Message -
From: Mark E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rick,
I was looking at your filter -- great idea.
One question (which falls under the processing order)
If you have:
BODY STOPALLTESTS CONTAINS Content-Type: application/x-zip-compressed
I think Declude Virus will still
- Original Message -
From: David Bryden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I see these (see below) statements for every message and can't figure
out what they are for. At first I thought they were how deep they IP
tests were digging into the header but then I looked at this message
header and found
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ok, I'm a bit of a newbit with regEx and I could really use some help
with this one. I know how to detect all of the HTML in a file by using
[^]*, but I'm not sure how to detect everything but the HTML. Could
someone please help me
- Original Message -
From: Mark E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Does anyone know if there's a plug-in for Outlook that lets you easily see
the SMTP header?
We're doing massive re-tuning to our Declude Gateway system which sits in
front of a 15,000 user Exchange system which moves about
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unfortunately that isn't an option in VBScript. What I was really
trying to do is return a string with just the HTML and not what is
before, after or in between it. When you execute a regEx expression in
VBScript, it returns the
1 - 100 of 679 matches
Mail list logo
