[Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

Why didn't negative weight get added for this piece of mail I received from the IPNOTINMX Test. Global.cfg IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -3 Default.junkmail file IPNOTINMX IGNORE DNS Lookup set q=mx netaff.com. Server: wgrz-lclci01.us.ad.gannett.com Address:

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

Why didn't negative weight get added for this piece of mail I received from the IPNOTINMX Test. Global.cfg IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -3 Default.junkmail file IPNOTINMX IGNORE Because you set the action to IGNORE. Change it to WARN and it should work.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

Are you sure about that? 03/31/2003 18:24:22 Qce246c0a00a00dbb WORDFILTER:4 nIPNOTINMX:-3 . Total weight = 1 03/31/2003 18:24:22 Qce246c0a00a00dbb L1 Message OK It seems to get triggered for other pieces of mail. Darrell -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

Why didn't negative weight get added for this piece of mail I received from the IPNOTINMX Test. The E-mail definitely should not fail the IPNOTINMX test, as the IP it came from is in the MX record for the domain in the return address. The log file snippet confirms that the E-mail did not fail

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

Scott, My expected behavior would be that this piece of mail *SHOULD* have had -3 subtracted from it. This is the behavior that I am shooting for. Now you asked So, I would need to ask, why do you think that the weight of 3 was not subtracted from the total weight of the E-mail? The log

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPNOTINMX

My expected behavior would be that this piece of mail *SHOULD* have had -3 subtracted from it. This is the behavior that I am shooting for. Correct. The log files for Declude show that it wasn't subtracted 03/31/2003 18:24:33 Qce102a4f0086c057 BASE64:5 SNIFFER:8 . Total weight = 13 Something

[Declude.JunkMail] from name test

I was wondering if Declude would consider adding a test that looks for long or strange from names before the @ in the from address of a message. It would be used as a weighted test. It might help push some e-mails into the delete weight range. Here are some examples of strange from addresses -

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] from name test

Hi Greg, Our free tool SPAMCHK (www.riedmann.it/spamchk) makes already some of this tests: SenderWithCode=6 SenderWithCodeMaybe=3 DigitsForCode=8 DigitsForCodeMaybe=4 With this parameters you can give 3 points for from-adresses with more then 4 digits and 6 points for senders with more then 8

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] from name test

I was wondering if Declude would consider adding a test that looks for long or strange from names before the @ in the from address of a message. It would be used as a weighted test. It might help push some e-mails into the delete weight range. Here are some examples of strange from addresses -

[Declude.JunkMail] Interesting article on SPAM

Here is an interesting article on spam from the legitimate marketer's perspective. http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2003/03/31/story4.html Thanks, Chuck Frolick ArgoNet, Inc. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came

[Declude.JunkMail] bigfoot.com?

Anyone know anything about bigfoot.com? One of our users says they are an email forwarding service and Spamcop shows a large ammount of Spam coming from their IP's: http://spamcop.net/w3m?action=checkblockip=64.15.239.131 Sheldon Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partnerhttp://www.tenforward.com

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] bigfoot.com?

Hi; We have received much SPAM from that address and they are in our blacklist - which simply means automatic deletion. Regards, Kami -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sheldon Koehler Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 11:55 AM To: [EMAIL

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] from name test

With this parameters you can give 3 points for from-adresses with more then 4 digits and 6 points for senders with more then 8 digits. Feel free to change the digit number and the points you want to give. This really is highly fragile answer. The VERP RFC, for one example, all but

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] bigfoot.com?

That is what I thought. Logs show this too... Sheldon Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partnerhttp://www.tenforward.com Ten Forward Communications 360-457-9023 Nationwide access, neighborhood support! Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] from name test

Greg, Is there a tutorial on what all these tests mean??? SenderWithCode=6 SenderWithCodeMaybe=3 DigitsForCode=8 DigitsForCodeMaybe=4 Its nice to assign a weight but I am unsure what all the different mean in the config file... Thanks, Adam -Original Message- From: [EMAIL

[Declude.JunkMail] Is there a content test available yet?

Is there a test to can mark an item as spam based on a string match in the message. There is some spam that repeatedly comes from different hotmail addresses but the message is identical. A content spam would allow me to get rid of it Thank you Harry Vanderzand inTown Internet Computer

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there a content test available yet?

Is there a test to can mark an item as spam based on a string match in the message. There is some spam that repeatedly comes from different hotmail addresses but the message is identical. A content spam would allow me to get rid of it Yes -- with Declude JunkMail Pro, you can set up a filter,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there a content test available yet?

The test is called filter. In most cases, you should not notice the extra load. However, if you have a large number of filters, it is possible that you could see performance degradation. -SCott At 05:07 PM 4/2/2003, Harry Vanderzand wrote: Thank you What

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Is there a content test available yet?

Thank you What test is it and does it put a lot more load on the system? Harry Vanderzand inTown Internet Computer Services 11 Belmont Ave. W. Kitchener, ON N2M 1L2 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: