Re: [Declude.JunkMail] KillListGen Utility

2003-06-09 Thread Scott MacLean
At 01:00 AM 06/09/2003, David Dodell wrote: Huh? Link is broken? You should be able to get it here: http://www.nerosoft.com/Download/KillListGenInst.exe Thanks Scott. I was following a link from the Declude website Scott, can you please fix the link on the Declude website? It's pointing to the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] KillListGen Utility

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Huh? Link is broken? You should be able to get it here: http://www.nerosoft.com/Download/KillListGenInst.exe Thanks Scott. I was following a link from the Declude website Scott, can you please fix the link on the Declude website? It's pointing to the wrong place. It's fixed now.

[Declude.JunkMail] Fwd:

2003-06-09 Thread Kevin Stanford
Is anyone doing anything about these messages. I am getting more and more by the day! Thanks, Kevin Received: from mail.stevenstransport.com [10.100.1.17] by mail.stevenstransport.com (SMTPD32-6.00) id AD69710A015C; Sun, 08 Jun 2003 14:24:25 -0500 Received: FROM declude.com BY

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Fwd:

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is anyone doing anything about these messages. I am getting more and more by the day! Unfortunately: Received: from mail.stevenstransport.com [10.100.1.17] by mail.stevenstransport.com (SMTPD32-6.00) id AD69710A015C; Sun, 08 Jun 2003 14:24:25 -0500 Received: FROM declude.com BY

[Declude.JunkMail] spamchk.exe

2003-06-09 Thread Adam Hobach
Hello, We are using Junkmail version 1.60. And we get these error messages every once in awhile which stops the server from sending mail out because of these error messages. Has anyone else run into this and what did you do to correct this.. Application popup: spamchk.exe - Application Error :

[Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Todd Ryan
Hi all, I want to run this by everyone before I do something potentially stupid...I have occasions where good yahoo.com mail fails a FILTER or SNIFFER test and along with failing NOPOSTMASTER and NOABUSE as yahoo always does, this throws it over my bounce threshhold. I'd like to ward this off by

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SMTP authorized versus random email

2003-06-09 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
Eric originally said this would be added in v7.14, but it was not. Perhaps it was added in v8.0; however, we're not running 8.0 yet so I don't know if it was actually added or not. But if it was, this would make it possible for Scott to add a test that flags authenticated SMTP sessions.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SpamIPs Test Idea

2003-06-09 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
One other thing to think about. My workstation is in my home office. My mail server is at my NOC. I have a VPN setup between my home office and the NOC for administration of the servers. Any mail I send shows a remote IP of my private address, sense my mail server received it through the VPN.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
Is my logic solid here? Anything I'm missing? Why not configure it like SPAMDOMAINS spamdomains C:\IMail\Declude\sd.txt x 5 -5 This will give +5 points to any mail having a sender-domain listet in sd.txt and failing this test. On the other side any legit message having such a

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] spamchk.exe

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
Hi Adam, Can you see these error messages also if you disable the spamchk-test in decludes global.cfg-file? Are there other external exe-files configured in the global.cfg? It seems like all other exe-files called from declude (SMTP, and SMTPD.EXE to deliver the message) cannot be started.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Fwd: Blank Emails from Declude

2003-06-09 Thread Kevin Stanford
I would recommend switching that poor mailserver to IMail (or any other mailserver that will include the IP address in the headers, which is almost all of them). My poor mail server is IMail v6. I received about 95 of these blank emails since last Friday with different received times, I have

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] spamchk.exe

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Application popup: smtp32.exe - Application Error : The application failed to initialize properly (0xc142). Click on OK to terminate the application. You can find out more about this at http://www.declude.com/dq.htm -- upgrading Declude to v1.65 should help (it's technically a Microsoft

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Todd Ryan
Um...er...yeah...I knew you could do that cough...cough... It DOES sound too simple. Have I been using JM for all these years and I didn't know you could have a pass weight in the config file?! I swear I only ever knew you could add weight if it failed. I guess I never questioned what all

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Why not configure it like SPAMDOMAINS spamdomains C:\IMail\Declude\sd.txt x 5 -5 This will give +5 points to any mail having a sender-domain listet in sd.txt and failing this test. On the other side any legit message having such a sender-domain that come from the right mailserver will

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
The catch here is that all E-mail from domains that aren't listed in the sd.txt file will get a weight of -5 added to them, so that spam from domains not listed in the sd.txt file will be more likely to be delivered. Is there any easy way to change this in a future release? As I can

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Bill Landry
A better way to do this is to setup a RDNS Filter and add a negative weight for any domain that you add that resolves correctly, like yahoo.com. For example: Global.cfg: REVDNS-FILTER filter M:\IMail\Declude\RevDNS-Filter.txt x 0 0 REVDNS-FILTER (samples): REVDNS -10 ENDSWITH .travelocity.com

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
The catch here is that all E-mail from domains that aren't listed in the sd.txt file will get a weight of -5 added to them, so that spam from domains not listed in the sd.txt file will be more likely to be delivered. Is there any easy way to change this in a future release? Do you mean that

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
A better way to do this is to setup a RDNS Filter and add a negative weight for any domain that you add that resolves correctly, like yahoo.com. For example: Global.cfg: REVDNS-FILTER filter M:\IMail\Declude\RevDNS-Filter.txt x 0 0 REVDNS-FILTER (samples): REVDNS -10 ENDSWITH

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
Do you mean that you think the SPAMDOMAINS test should work with domains that aren't listed in the sd.txt file? If so, what should the reverse DNS entry match? No. I mean that the test fails only if the from-domain was found in the sd.txt file and the corresponding REVDNS- records does

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread Charles Frolick
Speaking of logging, would it be possible to add using a syslog daemon as an option, I don't know off hand if it will save any processing power, but it seems like it might since you will no longer have to manage log file resources (locking, checking creation, destination folder). It would

[Declude.JunkMail] fresh spamdomains thread

2003-06-09 Thread John Shacklett
We haven't beaten SPAMDOMAINS sufficiently to death, so here's my contribution. I have two observations: One: I have a line in my sd.txt file that says: msn.com hotmail.com as have several of the submitted spamdomain candidate lists. I just found a message in my HOLD queue that failed

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
Speaking of logging, would it be possible to add using a syslog daemon as an option, I don't know off hand if it will save any processing power, but it seems like it might since you will no longer have to manage log file resources (locking, checking creation, destination folder). It would

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Logging optimization question

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Speaking of logging, would it be possible to add using a syslog daemon as an option, I don't know off hand if it will save any processing power, but it seems like it might since you will no longer have to manage log file resources (locking, checking creation, destination folder). This is in the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] fresh spamdomains thread

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Are you sure that the line in your sd.txt file is exactly msn.com hotmail.com (no spaces or other characters after hotmail.com)? Yes. I copied that line and pasted it exactly and I double checked the whitespace before I composed my questions. One last thing to check: Is that the last line

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
The problem here is that instead of having a test with 2 results (pass/fail), you've got a test with 3 results (pass/fail/na). That would require a major change to the Declude architecture to handle. But it would make sense G. Would it? The only tests I can think of that can have more than 2

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Suggestion: CONFIDENCE Test

2003-06-09 Thread Markus Gufler
Today's discussions gave me the idea of some form of Confidence test. Ideally, that test should NOT require any external config files (low maintenance). It is somewhat similar to the IPNOTINMX positive test - in that it is intended to assign a negative weight for email that has a high

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Karen D. Oland
Or, simply fixing the one test to have pass/fail weights assignable with each test (in the .txt file, rather than the weights defined once in the global.cfg, where in this case, they would be set to zero, zero -- thus unknown domains are ignored) something like: .yahoo.co .yahoo. 5 -5 voila - a

[Declude.JunkMail] DSN In The Subject?

2003-06-09 Thread Dan Geiser
Hello, All, Can someone tell me what it means, in the context of this discussion list, when someone puts DSN in the subject? Thanks, Dan Geiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] This E-mail is scanned and free from viruses.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Using SPAMDOMAINS and negative weights?

2003-06-09 Thread Andy Schmidt
Would it? In my opinion, yes. What he basically wants is: A) if domain does not appear in the SPAMDOMAINS file, then the weight should remain uneffected (the outcome is: N/A - Not applicable). B) if domain DOES appear in SPAMDOMAINS file and matches, then credit is given for good behavior

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DSN In The Subject?

2003-06-09 Thread Dan Geiser
Hi, Scott, Can someone tell me what it means, in the context of this discussion list, when someone puts DSN in the subject? That normally means that the E-mail failed the DSN test (which is run by http://www.rfc-ignorant.org ). It usually means that the mailserver that sent the E-mail is

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DSN In The Subject?

2003-06-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
Can someone tell me what it means, in the context of this discussion list, when someone puts DSN in the subject? That normally means that the E-mail failed the DSN test (which is run by http://www.rfc-ignorant.org ). It usually means that the mailserver that sent the E-mail is running