RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop

2004-04-28 Thread Markus Gufler



I completely agree.

Markus

  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
  MattSent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:21 AMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
  accurate is spamcop
  SpamCop has a serious problem with blacklisting large ISP mail 
  servers. Just yesterday I had three false positives partially caused by 
  SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my hold weight for the domains in question, 
  and hitting E-mail coming from adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr and netvision.net.il, 
  all large ISP mail servers. Based on my review of SpamCop on these ISP 
  mail servers, I estimate that they have between a 1 in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance 
  of a message getting improperly tagged when they come through such an 
  ISP. This also caries over to the likes of AOL and Road Runner.I 
  once contacted one of their "Deputies" about the issue and their response was 
  that "SpamCop is aggressive." Unfortunately their failure to resolve 
  this long-standing problem of treating an ISP mail server that sends 99.99% 
  legit E-mail just the same as a mail server belonging to a spam house weakens 
  the value of their blacklist a great deal and causes administrators like 
  ourselves a lot of frustration that something so obvious couldn't be 
  corrected.SpamCop also has a fundamental flaw in that submitted spam 
  that gets forwarded from one server to a destination often causes the 
  forwarding server to get tagged, and forged headers can also trick them from 
  time to time.I would suggest weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of 
  your hold weight, and add as many reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is 
  however a very important test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam 
  reaching my server.MattDoris Dean wrote:
  



Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with 
spamcop?

TIA
Doris-- 
=
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
http://www.mailpure.com/software/
=


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop

2004-04-28 Thread Shayne Embry
Title: Message



Personally, I don't consider this a problem with SpamCop. I understand 
that different people have different needs, but in my case every message 
entering my system from adelphia.net and wanadoo.fr is spam.

Shayne


  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:21 
  PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: 
  [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcopSpamCop has a 
  serious problem with blacklisting large ISP mail servers. Just yesterday 
  I had three false positives partially caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% 
  of my hold weight for the domains in question, and hitting E-mail coming from 
  adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr and netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail 
  servers. Based on my review of SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I 
  estimate that they have between a 1 in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance of a message 
  getting improperly tagged when they come through such an ISP. This also 
  caries over to the likes of AOL and Road Runner.I once contacted one 
  of their "Deputies" about the issue and their response was that "SpamCop is 
  aggressive." Unfortunately their failure to resolve this long-standing 
  problem of treating an ISP mail server that sends 99.99% legit E-mail just the 
  same as a mail server belonging to a spam house weakens the value of their 
  blacklist a great deal and causes administrators like ourselves a lot of 
  frustration that something so obvious couldn't be corrected.SpamCop 
  also has a fundamental flaw in that submitted spam that gets forwarded from 
  one server to a destination often causes the forwarding server to get tagged, 
  and forged headers can also trick them from time to time.I would 
  suggest weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold weight, and add as 
  many reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however a very important 
  test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam reaching my 
  server.MattDoris Dean wrote:
  



Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with 
spamcop?

TIA
Doris-- 
=
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
http://www.mailpure.com/software/
=


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

2004-04-28 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
Title: Message









So, if I sent you a message from my home
ISP account, which is Adelphia, you would automatically consider it spam?





John Tolmachoff

Engineer/Consultant/Owner

eServices For You







-Original Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shayne Embry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 6:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail]
How accurate is spamcop





Personally, I don't consider this a
problem with SpamCop. I understand that different people have different needs,
but in my case every message entering my system from adelphia.net and
wanadoo.fr is spam.











Shayne











-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Tuesday, April
 27, 2004 6:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
How accurate is spamcop

SpamCop has a serious problem with blacklisting large
ISP mail servers. Just yesterday I had three false positives partially
caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my hold weight for the domains in
question, and hitting E-mail coming from adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr and
netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail servers. Based on my review of
SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I estimate that they have between a 1 in 20
and a 1 in 50 chance of a message getting improperly tagged when they come
through such an ISP. This also caries over to the likes of AOL and Road
Runner.

I once contacted one of their Deputies about the issue and their
response was that SpamCop is aggressive. Unfortunately their
failure to resolve this long-standing problem of treating an ISP mail server
that sends 99.99% legit E-mail just the same as a mail server belonging to a
spam house weakens the value of their blacklist a great deal and causes
administrators like ourselves a lot of frustration that something so obvious
couldn't be corrected.

SpamCop also has a fundamental flaw in that submitted spam that gets forwarded
from one server to a destination often causes the forwarding server to get tagged,
and forged headers can also trick them from time to time.

I would suggest weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold weight, and
add as many reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however a very
important test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam reaching my
server.

Matt



Doris Dean wrote:





Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with
spamcop?











TIA





Doris







-- =MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.http://www.mailpure.com/software/=










RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

2004-04-28 Thread Shayne Embry
Title: Message



John,

I 
didn't say that. In my case I haven't received any legitimate email from those 
domains and I do receive a considerable amount of spam from them, so I tend to 
treat them accordingly.

To 
answer theoriginal question,in my case SpamCop is very, very 
effective and I use it aggressively. I rarely see a false positive. But as I 
said, everyone has different needs. I'm not trying to disagree with anyone 
posting here about their experiences and practices. Just relaying my 
experience.

Shayne


  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists)Sent: Wednesday, April 
  28, 2004 9:07 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: 
  RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop
  
  So, if I sent you a 
  message from my home ISP account, which is Adelphia, you would automatically 
  consider it spam?
  
  
  John 
  Tolmachoff
  Engineer/Consultant/Owner
  eServices For 
  You
  
  
  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of Shayne 
  EmbrySent: 
  Wednesday, 
  April 28, 2004 
  6:46 
  AMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
  accurate is spamcop
  
  
  Personally, I don't 
  consider this a problem with SpamCop. I understand that different people have 
  different needs, but in my case every message entering my system from 
  adelphia.net and wanadoo.fr is spam.
  
  
  
  Shayne
  
  
  
-Original 
Message-From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, April 27, 
2004 6:21 
PMTo: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
accurate is spamcop
SpamCop has a serious problem with blacklisting 
large ISP mail servers. Just yesterday I had three false positives 
partially caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my hold weight for the 
domains in question, and hitting E-mail coming from adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr 
and netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail servers. Based on my review 
of SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I estimate that they have between a 1 
in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance of a message getting improperly tagged when they 
come through such an ISP. This also caries over to the likes of AOL 
and Road Runner.I once contacted one of their "Deputies" about the 
issue and their response was that "SpamCop is aggressive." 
Unfortunately their failure to resolve this long-standing problem of 
treating an ISP mail server that sends 99.99% legit E-mail just the same as 
a mail server belonging to a spam house weakens the value of their blacklist 
a great deal and causes administrators like ourselves a lot of frustration 
that something so obvious couldn't be corrected.SpamCop also has a 
fundamental flaw in that submitted spam that gets forwarded from one server 
to a destination often causes the forwarding server to get tagged, and 
forged headers can also trick them from time to time.I would suggest 
weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold weight, and add as many 
reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however a very important test, 
and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam reaching my 
server.MattDoris Dean 
wrote:

Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with 
spamcop?



TIA

Doris
-- =MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.http://www.mailpure.com/software/=


[Declude.JunkMail] Perl Script Spamheaders

2004-04-28 Thread John Olden



Any Perl savy people out there using the Mime::Lite module in 
any of their scripts figure out how to generate valid Message-IDs in mail sent 
from online forms?
I'm trying to get our forms to pass the "Spamheaders" test and 
this is a sticking point. I cannot find any information online on 
implementation. The Cpan manuals just list "message-id" once and it's in a list 
of items.

I've tried the following code but all I getis the 
automatically generated Imail message-id:
===
sub smtp_mail {MIME::Lite-send('smtp', 
"mail.mydomain.com"); $idnum = time(); $randnum = rand(); 

my $msg = MIME::Lite-new( 
 From = 
$def_from,  
To = 
$def_to, 
Cc = $def_cc, 
 Subject = 
$def_subject, Message-ID 
= 
[EMAIL PROTECTED], 
Type = 'multipart/related'  
 ); 

$msg-attach( 
 Type = 'text/html', 
 Data ="" qq| 
 $TG{'MessageBody'}| 
  ); 

$msg-attach( 
 Type 
= 'text',  
Path = $EmailTempFile,  
 ); 

$msg-send or die ("Error sending e-mail: 
$!");}
===
John Olden - 
Systems AdministratorChampaign Park District


[Declude.JunkMail] OT: New Declude Site

2004-04-28 Thread Andy Ognenoff
Scott,

I like the new site.  Very cool idea to add the RSS feed!

Andy Ognenoff
Online Systems Administrator
-
Cousins Submarines, Inc.
http://www.cousinssubs.com


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

2004-04-28 Thread ISPhuset Nordic AS
Title: Message



Spamcop is NOT ever reliable for deleting spam, as one of 
several tests its ok but never ever based on them alone.

An example. The largest broadband company here in Norway 
tries to force all there customers to use there mailservers as SMTP, they ended 
up on Spamcop's list in 72 hours.

Most mail came through but a lot of people lost mail 
because of idiots using spamcop as a test for deleting mail.

Benny

  
  
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shayne 
  EmbrySent: 28. april 2004 16:34To: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
  accurate is SpamCop
  
  John,
  
  I 
  didn't say that. In my case I haven't received any legitimate email from those 
  domains and I do receive a considerable amount of spam from them, so I tend to 
  treat them accordingly.
  
  To 
  answer theoriginal question,in my case SpamCop is very, very 
  effective and I use it aggressively. I rarely see a false positive. But as I 
  said, everyone has different needs. I'm not trying to disagree with anyone 
  posting here about their experiences and practices. Just relaying my 
  experience.
  
  Shayne
  
  

-Original Message-From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John 
Tolmachoff (Lists)Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 9:07 
AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: 
[Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

So, if I sent you 
a message from my home ISP account, which is Adelphia, you would 
automatically consider it spam?


John 
Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For 
You


-Original 
Message-From: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shayne EmbrySent: Wednesday, 
April 28, 2004 
6:46 
AMTo: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
accurate is spamcop


Personally, I don't 
consider this a problem with SpamCop. I understand that different people 
have different needs, but in my case every message entering my system from 
adelphia.net and wanadoo.fr is spam.



Shayne



  -Original 
  Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, April 
  27, 2004 6:21 
  PMTo: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How 
  accurate is spamcop
  SpamCop has a serious problem with blacklisting 
  large ISP mail servers. Just yesterday I had three false positives 
  partially caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my hold weight for 
  the domains in question, and hitting E-mail coming from adelphia.net, 
  wanadoo.fr and netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail servers. Based 
  on my review of SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I estimate that they 
  have between a 1 in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance of a message getting 
  improperly tagged when they come through such an ISP. This also 
  caries over to the likes of AOL and Road Runner.I once contacted 
  one of their "Deputies" about the issue and their response was that 
  "SpamCop is aggressive." Unfortunately their failure to resolve this 
  long-standing problem of treating an ISP mail server that sends 99.99% 
  legit E-mail just the same as a mail server belonging to a spam house 
  weakens the value of their blacklist a great deal and causes 
  administrators like ourselves a lot of frustration that something so 
  obvious couldn't be corrected.SpamCop also has a fundamental flaw 
  in that submitted spam that gets forwarded from one server to a 
  destination often causes the forwarding server to get tagged, and forged 
  headers can also trick them from time to time.I would suggest 
  weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold weight, and add as many 
  reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however a very important 
  test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam reaching my 
  server.MattDoris Dean 
  wrote:
  
  Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with 
  spamcop?
  
  
  
  TIA
  
  Doris
  -- =MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.http://www.mailpure.com/software/=


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

2004-04-28 Thread Matt




Shayne,

They regularly list AOL and Road Runner mail servers too. I was just
giving you examples of what happened on one single day and what ended
up getting held on my system. It took multiple tests showing FP's in
order for each message to get held.

Here's some SpamCop detail on AOL's mail server's for instance:

 http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action="">

Note that they fare better than most large ISP's because they don't
pump hardly any broadband customers out of these servers, and dial-up
users are highly unlikely to get hijacked by a spammer.

Matt



Shayne Embry wrote:

  
  Message
  
  
  John,
  
  I didn't say that. In my case I haven't
received any legitimate email from those domains and I do receive a
considerable amount of spam from them, so I tend to treat them
accordingly.
  
  To answer theoriginal question,in my case
SpamCop is very, very effective and I use it aggressively. I rarely see
a false positive. But as I said, everyone has different needs. I'm not
trying to disagree with anyone posting here about their experiences and
practices. Just relaying my experience.
  
  Shayne
  
  
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John
Tolmachoff (Lists)
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 9:07 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop



So, if I
sent you a message from my home ISP account, which is Adelphia, you
would automatically consider it spam?


John
Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices
For You



-Original
Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Shayne Embry
Sent: Wednesday,
April 28, 2004 6:46
AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE:
[Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop


Personally,
I don't consider this a problem with SpamCop. I understand that
different people have different needs, but in my case every message
entering my system from adelphia.net and wanadoo.fr is spam.





Shayne





  -Original
Message-
  From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matt
  Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:21 PM
  To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: Re:
[Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop
  SpamCop has a serious problem
with blacklisting large ISP mail servers. Just yesterday I had three
false positives partially caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my
hold weight for the domains in question, and hitting E-mail coming from
adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr and netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail
servers. Based on my review of SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I
estimate that they have between a 1 in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance of a
message getting improperly tagged when they come through such an ISP.
This also caries over to the likes of AOL and Road Runner.
  
I once contacted one of their "Deputies" about the issue and their
response was that "SpamCop is aggressive." Unfortunately their failure
to resolve this long-standing problem of treating an ISP mail server
that sends 99.99% legit E-mail just the same as a mail server belonging
to a spam house weakens the value of their blacklist a great deal and
causes administrators like ourselves a lot of frustration that
something so obvious couldn't be corrected.
  
SpamCop also has a fundamental flaw in that submitted spam that gets
forwarded from one server to a destination often causes the forwarding
server to get tagged, and forged headers can also trick them from time
to time.
  
I would suggest weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold
weight, and add as many reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however
a very important test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam
reaching my server.
  
Matt
  
  
  
Doris Dean wrote:
  
  
  
  Is it safe to simply delete an
email flagged with spamcop?
  
  
  
  
  
  TIA
  
  
  Doris
  
  
  
  
  -- 
  =
  MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
  http://www.mailpure.com/software/
  =



  


-- 
=
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
http://www.mailpure.com/software/
=




RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop

2004-04-28 Thread Shayne Embry
Title: Message



Good 
point, Matt. And thanks to folks like youfor putting in the time to look 
at these issues. I don't normally jump into these discussions, but seeing you 
mentiona few of those domainsearlier prompted me to act out of 
character and respond due to the problems I have had with 
them.

I 
justprefer to assign ahigher score toSpamCop than what I 
perceive others to be doing, based on these posts. To each his/her own 
methods.

To 
clarify, I agree that deleting on a single test isNOT a good 
idea.

Shayne


  
  -Original Message-From: 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  On Behalf Of MattSent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 10:21 
  AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: 
  [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is 
  SpamCopShayne,They regularly list AOL and Road 
  Runner mail servers too. I was just giving you examples of what happened 
  on one single day and what ended up getting held on my system. It took 
  multiple tests showing FP's in order for each message to get 
  held.Here's some SpamCop detail on AOL's mail server's for 
  instance: http://www.spamcop.net/w3m?action="">Note 
  that they fare better than most large ISP's because they don't pump hardly any 
  broadband customers out of these servers, and dial-up users are highly 
  unlikely to get hijacked by a 
spammer.Matt


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Perl Script Spamheaders

2004-04-28 Thread Colbeck, Andrew
Title: Message



John, I'm 
thinking that you're not qualifying the right hand side of the message-id 
variable as text.

Let me put that 
another way: why are you not putting quotes around the parts that are text, and 
why are you only escaping the @ sign and not the hyphen or the GT and LT 
signs?

What happens if 
you change the line, on a trial basis, to:

 Message-ID = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',
(I don't know if 
any of the text inside the quotes actually needs to be escaped, but it seems 
worth mentioning.)

Andrew 
8)

  
  -Original Message-From: John Olden 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 
  2004 7:53 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: 
  [Declude.JunkMail] Perl Script  Spamheaders
  Any Perl savy people out there using the Mime::Lite module 
  in any of their scripts figure out how to generate valid Message-IDs in mail 
  sent from online forms?
  I'm trying to get our forms to pass the "Spamheaders" test 
  and this is a sticking point. I cannot find any information online on 
  implementation. The Cpan manuals just list "message-id" once and it's in a 
  list of items.
  
  I've tried the following code but all I getis the 
  automatically generated Imail message-id:
  ===
  sub smtp_mail {MIME::Lite-send('smtp', 
  "mail.mydomain.com"); $idnum = time(); $randnum = rand(); 
  
  my $msg = MIME::Lite-new( 
   From = 
  $def_from,  
  To = 
  $def_to, 
  Cc = $def_cc, 
   Subject = 
  $def_subject, Message-ID 
  = 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED], 
  Type = 'multipart/related'  
   ); 
  
  $msg-attach( 
   Type = 'text/html', 
   Data ="" qq| 
   $TG{'MessageBody'}| 
); 
  
  $msg-attach( 
   Type 
  = 'text',  
  Path = $EmailTempFile,  
   ); 
  
  $msg-send or die ("Error sending e-mail: 
  $!");}
  ===
  John Olden - 
  Systems AdministratorChampaign Park 
District


[Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Rick Hogue
Title: Message



We turned on the 
ipblacklist and domainblacklist and populated them from a couple of pretty good 
sources last Thursday and all of a sudden we were not getting anywhere close to 
the amount of spam, however some customers who use ColdFusion started not 
getting much of their email. Also our dual process or email server went from 
being used at about 35% to well over 90 and at certain times 100% sustained. 
causing backups on delivery of email. the IPblacklist is about 90k and the 
dmainblacklist is about 641k. We only have about 28000 incoming and 18000 
outgoing emails per day. Any clues as to why this might be happening? 


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 
1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web 
site


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

We turned on the ipblacklist and domainblacklist and populated them from a 
couple of pretty good sources last Thursday and all of a sudden we were 
not getting anywhere close to the amount of spam, however some customers 
who use ColdFusion started not getting much of their email. Also our dual 
process or email server went from being used at about 35% to well over 90 
and at certain times 100% sustained. causing backups on delivery of email. 
the IPblacklist is about 90k and the dmainblacklist is about 641k. We only 
have about 28000 incoming and 18000 outgoing emails per day. Any clues as 
to why this might be happening?
It's happening because you've added a large amount to what Declude JunkMail 
has to do.  A 90K IP blacklist is about 6,000 IPs, and a 641K domain 
blacklist is about 30,000 domains.  That means that for every E-mail that 
comes in, Declude JunkMail has to compare the IP with 6,000 IP ranges and 
compare the return address with 30,000 different domains.  That's going to 
take some time.

I am surprised that it is using up so much CPU time.  Are those IP 
blacklists and sender blacklists (ipfile and fromfile), or are those 
filters (if the domain blacklist is set up as a body filter, it would 
account for the very high CPU usage)?

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


[Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread Jeff Maze - Hostmaster
Hello,
Can IP addresses in conjunction with e-mail addresses (or domain
names) be added to a Whitelists.txt file within a per-domain configuration?
Thanks.. -Jeff


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Can IP addresses in conjunction with e-mail addresses (or domain
names) be added to a Whitelists.txt file within a per-domain configuration?
No, currently the whitelistfiles can only use domains or E-mail addresses.
   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Perl Script Spamheaders

2004-04-28 Thread John Olden
 why are you not putting quotes around the parts
 that are text, and why are you only escaping the @ sign and not the
hyphen
 or the GT and LT signs?

Good question. I copied part of it from someone else's source and didn't
pay attention to that.

 What happens if you change the line, on a trial basis, to:

 Message-ID =  '[EMAIL PROTECTED]',

The problem is still there. The message header has:

Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-RBL-Warning: SPAMHEADERS: This E-mail has headers consistent with spam
[421e].

I even tried changing your example to something more inline with the
auto-generated one where the date and time were at the beginning.

John Olden - Systems Administrator
Champaign Park District


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread Jeff Maze - Hostmaster
Ok thanks..

And to just re-verify something, if the whitelist.txt file is in the domain
folder (per-domain config), the GLOBAL.CFG is skipped and the whitelist.txt
file is used instead for whitelisting e-mail addresses.  Or are they used in
conjunction with each other?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file


 Can IP addresses in conjunction with e-mail addresses (or 
domain
names) be added to a Whitelists.txt file within a per-domain configuration?

No, currently the whitelistfiles can only use domains or E-mail addresses.

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.



---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

And to just re-verify something, if the whitelist.txt file is in the domain
folder (per-domain config), the GLOBAL.CFG is skipped and the whitelist.txt
file is used instead for whitelisting e-mail addresses.  Or are they used in
conjunction with each other?
That's handled the same regardless of whether whitelistfiles are used or not.
If there is per-user config file, it will be used.  Otherwise, if a 
per-domain config file, that will be used.  If neither are present, the 
\IMail\Declude\$default$.JunkMail file will be used if the E-mail is 
incoming, or the \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file will be used if the E-mail 
is outgoing.

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


[Declude.JunkMail] ALLRECIPS variable

2004-04-28 Thread Roger Eriksson
Hi,
Something just struck me. Wouldn't it be a good idea to have the 
individual addresses in the ALLRECIPS variable surrounded by angled 
brackets, if it is possible to do that? It only makes sense to use 
this variable with the CONTAINS filtertype, and by having such 
brackets we could easily choose between different types of matches 
(exact, begins with, ends with, partial match) for the individual 
filter entries. Or have I missed something completely?

/Roger
---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] ALLRECIPS variable

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Something just struck me. Wouldn't it be a good idea to have the 
individual addresses in the ALLRECIPS variable surrounded by angled 
brackets, if it is possible to do that? It only makes sense to use this 
variable with the CONTAINS filtertype, and by having such brackets we 
could easily choose between different types of matches (exact, begins 
with, ends with, partial match) for the individual filter entries. Or have 
I missed something completely?
That is a good idea; that will be changed for the next release.
   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread Jeff Maze - Hostmaster
Ooops.. Sorry about that.. I meant to say $default$.junkmail file..

Just trying to get a domain configured correct in a per-domain config with
the whitelist.txt file (having problems and hearing about it from the
client).

So, if there is a whiltelistip entry in the $default$.junkmail file and the
message originates from that IP, it's whitelisted (as it normally and should
do).

And if an e-mail comes from [EMAIL PROTECTED], that e-mail is first checked for
the WHITELIST FROM in the GLOBAL.CFG file, if it's not there then it's
checked again the WHITELIST.TXT file within the per-domain configuration.

Is this correct?

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file


And to just re-verify something, if the whitelist.txt file is in the 
domain folder (per-domain config), the GLOBAL.CFG is skipped and the 
whitelist.txt file is used instead for whitelisting e-mail addresses.  
Or are they used in conjunction with each other?

That's handled the same regardless of whether whitelistfiles are used or
not.

If there is per-user config file, it will be used.  Otherwise, if a
per-domain config file, that will be used.  If neither are present, the
\IMail\Declude\$default$.JunkMail file will be used if the E-mail is
incoming, or the \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file will be used if the E-mail
is outgoing.

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.



---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Perl Script Spamheaders

2004-04-28 Thread Ryan Carmelo Briones
John Olden wrote:
Any Perl savy people out there using the Mime::Lite module in any of 
their scripts figure out how to generate valid Message-IDs in mail 
sent from online forms?
I'm trying to get our forms to pass the Spamheaders test and this is 
a sticking point. I cannot find any information online on 
implementation. The Cpan manuals just list message-id once and it's 
in a list of items.
 
I've tried the following code but all I get is the automatically 
generated Imail message-id:
===
sub smtp_mail {
MIME::Lite-send('smtp', mail.mydomain.com);
$idnum = time();
$randnum = rand();
my $msg = MIME::Lite-new(
From= $def_from,
To  = $def_to,
Cc  = $def_cc,
Subject = $def_subject,
Message-ID =  [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Type= 'multipart/related'
);
 
$msg-attach(
Type = 'text/html',
Data = qq|
$TG{'MessageBody'}|
);
 
$msg-attach(
Type = 'text',
Path = $EmailTempFile,
);
 
$msg-send or die (Error sending e-mail: $!);
}
===

John Olden - Systems Administrator
Champaign Park District
Like Andrew Colbeck said, the right hand side of Message-ID is a bad 
value. If you don't use double-quotes around that, then perl would be 
evaluating that as a filehandle, and either spitting out errors ( if you 
have strict and warnings turned on ) or returning undef, which is why 
I'm assuming Imail is doing it for you. That's my best guess. HTH.

Ryan
---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist.txt file

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Just trying to get a domain configured correct in a per-domain config with
the whitelist.txt file (having problems and hearing about it from the
client).
Just so long as you have the WHITELISTFILE option in the correct config 
file, and the file exists and has the appropriate domain(s) and/or E-mail 
address(es) listed, it should work.  Remember, though, that there are lots 
of possible E-mail addresses (From:, Sender:, X-Sender:, Reply-To:, etc.); 
the one from the X-Declude-Sender: header (or the MAIL FROM entry in the 
IMail SMTP log file) is the one to use.

So, if there is a whiltelistip entry in the $default$.junkmail file and the
message originates from that IP, it's whitelisted (as it normally and should
do).
I'm not sure what you mean?  Are you referring to WHITELIST IP lines 
(which only work in the global.cfg file)?

And if an e-mail comes from [EMAIL PROTECTED], that e-mail is first checked for
the WHITELIST FROM in the GLOBAL.CFG file, if it's not there then it's
checked again the WHITELIST.TXT file within the per-domain configuration.
Correct (where from is the address in the X-Declude-Sender: header).
   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop

2004-04-28 Thread jcochran
 Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with spamcop?

We weight SpamCop pretty high, but don't delete on it alone.  We hold 
on 10, delete on 30, and give SpamCop a 12.  We were deleting on 20, 
but as we tune the weights we find we need to bump that up to ensure 
we didn't push the filters too high.  Our goal is to delete on 20.

Jeff
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop

2004-04-28 Thread jcochran
 Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with spamcop?

We weight SpamCop pretty high, but don't delete on it alone.  We hold 
on 10, delete on 30, and give SpamCop a 12.  We were deleting on 20, 
but as we tune the weights we find we need to bump that up to ensure 
we didn't push the filters too high.  Our goal is to delete on 20.

Jeff
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


[Declude.JunkMail] When does Declude re-read .junkmail files?

2004-04-28 Thread Ryan Carmelo Briones
I have this weird problem. I've been trying to get WHITELISTFILE to work 
for days with no avail. I was pretty sure I had followed all the 
instructions, and still no results. So I left the settings in there, and 
gave up. Well, sparked by the Perl Script  Spamheaders email and my 
finding of the BADHEADERS/SPMAHEADERS explainer ( 
http://www.declude.com/tools/header.php ), I decided to embark on making 
my PHP mailer compliant. When I sent the email, I checked the headers 
for the BADHEADERS code and there I saw it: Whitelisted[0]. *gasp*  I 
had just recieved 2 emails that weren't whitelisted this morning.( spam 
actually.. ) As these were not the result I wanted at this time, I went 
ahead and removed myself from the whitelist file and resent the mail. 
Still whitelisted. So I deleted the whitelist file and removed the 
WHITELISTFILE thingie from $default$.junkmail and created a 
USER.junkmail in my per-domain folder. Still whitelisted. The only think 
that I can fathom the problem being is that Declude doesn't re-read my 
junkmail files until it reboots or something is restarted. Thanks for 
your time.

Ryan
---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] When does Declude re-read .junkmail files?

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

I have this weird problem. I've been trying to get WHITELISTFILE to work 
for days with no avail. I was pretty sure I had followed all the 
instructions, and still no results. So I left the settings in there, and 
gave up. Well, sparked by the Perl Script  Spamheaders email and my 
finding of the BADHEADERS/SPMAHEADERS explainer ( 
http://www.declude.com/tools/header.php ), I decided to embark on making 
my PHP mailer compliant. When I sent the email, I checked the headers for 
the BADHEADERS code and there I saw it: Whitelisted[0]. *gasp*  I had just 
recieved 2 emails that weren't whitelisted this morning.( spam actually.. 
) As these were not the result I wanted at this time, I went ahead and 
removed myself from the whitelist file and resent the mail. Still 
whitelisted. So I deleted the whitelist file and removed the WHITELISTFILE 
thingie from $default$.junkmail and created a USER.junkmail in my 
per-domain folder. Still whitelisted. The only think that I can fathom the 
problem being is that Declude doesn't re-read my junkmail files until it 
reboots or something is restarted. Thanks for your time.
Declude JunkMail detects changes to those files in real time.
The log files are your friend here.  If you check the log file, it should 
help explain what happened.  If there isn't enough information in there, 
you can use LOGLEVEL HIGH instead of LOGLEVEL LOW in the 
\IMail\Declude\global.cfg file, which will record information such as which 
config file Declude JunkMail is using.

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Rick Hogue
ipfile and fromfile


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web site
 
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 1:06 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage


We turned on the ipblacklist and domainblacklist and populated them 
from a couple of pretty good sources last Thursday and all of a sudden 
we were not getting anywhere close to the amount of spam, however some 
customers who use ColdFusion started not getting much of their email. 
Also our dual process or email server went from being used at about 35% 
to well over 90 and at certain times 100% sustained. causing backups on
delivery of email.
the IPblacklist is about 90k and the dmainblacklist is about 641k. We 
only have about 28000 incoming and 18000 outgoing emails per day. Any 
clues as to why this might be happening?

It's happening because you've added a large amount to what Declude JunkMail
has to do.  A 90K IP blacklist is about 6,000 IPs, and a 641K domain
blacklist is about 30,000 domains.  That means that for every E-mail that
comes in, Declude JunkMail has to compare the IP with 6,000 IP ranges and
compare the return address with 30,000 different domains.  That's going to
take some time.

I am surprised that it is using up so much CPU time.  Are those IP
blacklists and sender blacklists (ipfile and fromfile), or are those
filters (if the domain blacklist is set up as a body filter, it would
account for the very high CPU usage)?

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


[Declude.JunkMail] Weird characters in email

2004-04-28 Thread Adrian Titei
Hi guys,

Has anyone seen weird characters in an email like that:

--- snip ---

Your message 

Cc:  Test User+ADs- 
Subject: May New Release Sleeves 
Sent:Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:39:37 -0500 

  did not reach the following recipient(s): 

   
 

  Subject: May New Release Sleeves 
  Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 14:39:37 -0500 
  From: a x [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

 
+ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg-
 
  MAY NEW RELEASE SLEEVES 
 
+ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg-
 

--- snip ---

Any clue where they might come from? Netscape Messenger 4.8 has been
used on IMail 7.15 with Declude 1.79i4.

Thanks,
Adrian
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

ipfile and fromfile
I just tested here, and a 600K fromfile caused about 50ms of CPU usage on a 
2GHz CPU server.  The 90K ipfile didn't show any noticeable CPU 
usage.  Even on a 1GHz CPU with 100,000 E-mails/day, that would only 
account for about 10% of the CPU usage.

I would recommend disabling both one at a time, to see if one of them 
specifically is causing the high CPU usage.

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weird characters in email

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Has anyone seen weird characters in an email like that:
Your message
  did not reach the following recipient(s):
+ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg- 

  MAY NEW RELEASE SLEEVES
+ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg- 

That's a bounce message from the remote end.  Those characters look a lot 
like some type of encoding (base64/uuencode/BinHex), but I think they are 
just random characters that are repeating (unless it is something very odd 
that is encoded).

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weird characters in email

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Can I send you the complete message (with headers) off list, to have a
look at it? It's not the firs one I've seen and punching part of the
string into Google returned some findings. I still have to dig through
them, but maybe if you have a look at the complete message, you'll get a
better understanding of what's going on.
I think there are two basic possibilities here:
[1] You sent an E-mail that bounced (in which case it might be interesting 
to know what those weird characters were for), or
[2] That was a spam that bounced back to you (in which case it's just spam).

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Rick Hogue
Thanks I have disabled both and still have high CPU usage. I run inoculate
as my virus protection as well but do not think it is really the problem. I
viewed the processes and I am still seeing 40 to 60 simultaneous  declude
calls with the same number of inoculate calls. The machine is a dual 866
machine with a gig of ram. Ram usage is 256m of 1g total. I am also running
diskkeeper 8.0 and the machine is Windows 2000 server with the latest
service packs.
Does that help in maybe figuring what the culprit might be?
By the way this just started like last Thursday when I upgraded to 1.79 on
Declude and added the ipfile and fromfile.


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web site
 
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 4:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage


ipfile and fromfile

I just tested here, and a 600K fromfile caused about 50ms of CPU usage on a
2GHz CPU server.  The 90K ipfile didn't show any noticeable CPU usage.  Even
on a 1GHz CPU with 100,000 E-mails/day, that would only account for about
10% of the CPU usage.

I would recommend disabling both one at a time, to see if one of them
specifically is causing the high CPU usage.

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weird characters in email

2004-04-28 Thread Adrian Titei
Scott,

Can I send you the complete message (with headers) off list, to have a
look at it? It's not the firs one I've seen and punching part of the
string into Google returned some findings. I still have to dig through
them, but maybe if you have a look at the complete message, you'll get a
better understanding of what's going on.

Thanks
Adrian

R. Scott Perry wrote:
 
 Has anyone seen weird characters in an email like that:
 
 Your message
did not reach the following recipient(s):
 
 +ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg-
 
MAY NEW RELEASE SLEEVES
 +ACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKgAqACoAKg-
 
 
 That's a bounce message from the remote end.  Those characters look a lot
 like some type of encoding (base64/uuencode/BinHex), but I think they are
 just random characters that are repeating (unless it is something very odd
 that is encoded).
 
 -Scott
 ---
 Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
 since 2000.
 Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
 vulnerability detection.
 Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.
 
 ---
 [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 PROTECTED], and
 type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
 at http://www.mail-archive.com.
 ---
 [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

-- 
Regards,
Adrian Titei
Director of IT
Jumbo Entertainment Inc.

p: 905-634-4244 x 232
f: 905-632-2964
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

=== Confidentiality Notice: 
This e-mail message and any attachment to same  contains confidential
information intended only for the person(s) to whom the said e-mail is
intended to be sent.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other
use of or the taking of any action and reliance upon this information by
persons or entities other than the intended recipient violates
confidentiality and is prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail
message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
e-mail message from your computer.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread R. Scott Perry

Thanks I have disabled both and still have high CPU usage. I run inoculate
as my virus protection as well but do not think it is really the problem.
In that case, you can go to the Task Manager, click on the Processes tab, 
and then click the CPU button.  That will sort the processes by CPU usage, 
with the offender(s) at the top.

I viewed the processes and I am still seeing 40 to 60 simultaneous  declude
calls with the same number of inoculate calls.
Did you make any DNS changes (switching DNS servers in the IMail SMTP 
settings, for example)?  That could cause the Declude.exe processes to stay 
in memory.

Are viruses getting caught?  If inoculate is not responding, the processes 
would stay in memory a long time (and viruses would not get caught).

   -Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers 
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver 
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Rick Hogue
SMTP is the culprit here. I can shut down declude and the usage is still at
100%.
No DNS changes have been made.
Viruses are being caught at the rate of about 1100 every 3 hours.
Is there any know issue on Imail that you know of on smtp. I am running
version 8.05 


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web site
 
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 5:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage


Thanks I have disabled both and still have high CPU usage. I run 
inoculate as my virus protection as well but do not think it is really the
problem.

In that case, you can go to the Task Manager, click on the Processes tab,
and then click the CPU button.  That will sort the processes by CPU usage,
with the offender(s) at the top.

I viewed the processes and I am still seeing 40 to 60 simultaneous  
declude calls with the same number of inoculate calls.

Did you make any DNS changes (switching DNS servers in the IMail SMTP
settings, for example)?  That could cause the Declude.exe processes to stay
in memory.

Are viruses getting caught?  If inoculate is not responding, the processes
would stay in memory a long time (and viruses would not get caught).

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


Re: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Matt




Is SMTP32.exe running at 100% or is it the total processor
utilization? I'm not sure how you might "shut down Declude" unless
you change the SMTP service to not call it and stop and restart it.
Your previous message strongly suggested that your virus scanner isn't
responding properly and that would be the first place to look. We're
doing about 35,000 messages a day and Monday set a record for viruses
which probably came in around 6,000. I would consider that volume of
viruses to be out of the ordinary, but Netsky loves to send huge
numbers of messages, with many going to invalid addresses that it
parses from Message-ID's. You might try turning off the nobody alias
if this is the case. Another strong suggestion would be to use F-Prot
instead of Inoculate. My testing of various virus scanners with
Declude showed F-Prot to be MUCH more efficient (the version that you
pay for). That might solve your problem right there. F-Prot is cheap
and it's the best command line scanner around when it comes to
efficiency, hands down.

With similar traffic on my server, and it being similar in size (a
little more powerful), it would croak no doubt about it with a
blacklist of 30,000 entries, in fact with a total of less than 5,000
lines of matches of various types, it couldn't manage if it wasn't for
SKIPIFWEIGHT which defeats most of the filters about 70% of the time
(not possible with ipfiles and fromfiles, though they are much leaner
than body searches).

Just throwing out a few ideas.

Matt



Rick Hogue wrote:

  SMTP is the culprit here. I can shut down declude and the usage is still at
100%.
No DNS changes have been made.
Viruses are being caught at the rate of about 1100 every 3 hours.
Is there any know issue on Imail that you know of on smtp. I am running
version 8.05 


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web site
 
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 5:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage


  
  
Thanks I have disabled both and still have high CPU usage. I run 
inoculate as my virus protection as well but do not think it is really the

  
  problem.

In that case, you can go to the Task Manager, click on the Processes tab,
and then click the CPU button.  That will sort the processes by CPU usage,
with the offender(s) at the top.

  
  
I viewed the processes and I am still seeing 40 to 60 simultaneous  
declude calls with the same number of inoculate calls.

  
  
Did you make any DNS changes (switching DNS servers in the IMail SMTP
settings, for example)?  That could cause the Declude.exe processes to stay
in memory.

Are viruses getting caught?  If inoculate is not responding, the processes
would stay in memory a long time (and viruses would not get caught).

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


  


-- 
=
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
http://www.mailpure.com/software/
=




[Declude.JunkMail] SPAMDOMAINS Failure

2004-04-28 Thread Jeff Maze - Hostmaster
Hello,
Had a client forward me an e-mail that failed the SPAMDOMAIN test
(along with a couple others).
Below are the internet headers of the SPAMDOMAINs failure (I can
post the full inet headers if desired):

X-RBL-Warning: SPAMDOMAINS: Spamdomain 'att.net' found: Address of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sent from invalid emhmta02.cdpd.airdata.com.
X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [199.88.234.47]

I have an entry of: att.net  in our spamdomains.txt file.  Now to
add this entry to the spamdomains.txt file, I would make the following
entry, correct?

att.net .airdata.com


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage

2004-04-28 Thread Rick Hogue



If I turn off SMTP my processor utilization is around 3 
percent. With SMTP turned on and Declude turned off SMTP is at 99% with Declude 
on it is 100% So I kind of doubt that it is Declude even with the large lists I 
am using.
Thanks for the advice on F-Prot I will look into that as a 
possibility. I like Innoculate but it is a bear to configure. If it had not been 
for Scott I would really have been in a mess with it.
I just checked the processors on that system and now I am 
running at between 20 and 45% rather than the 100 I have been for the past 4 
days. I guess I am going to have to look through snoop to see what it possibly 
could be.

Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 
1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web 
site





From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of 
MattSent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 7:22 PMTo: 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU 
usage
Is SMTP32.exe running at 100% or is it the total processor 
utilization? I'm not sure how you might "shut down Declude" unless 
you change the SMTP service to not call it and stop and restart it. Your 
previous message strongly suggested that your virus scanner isn't responding 
properly and that would be the first place to look. We're doing about 
35,000 messages a day and Monday set a record for viruses which probably came in 
around 6,000. I would consider that volume of viruses to be out of the 
ordinary, but Netsky loves to send huge numbers of messages, with many going to 
invalid addresses that it parses from Message-ID's. You might try turning 
off the nobody alias if this is the case. Another strong suggestion would 
be to use F-Prot instead of Inoculate. My testing of various virus 
scanners with Declude showed F-Prot to be MUCH more efficient (the version that 
you pay for). That might solve your problem right there. F-Prot is 
cheap and it's the best command line scanner around when it comes to efficiency, 
hands down.With similar traffic on my server, and it being similar in 
size (a little more powerful), it would croak no doubt about it with a blacklist 
of 30,000 entries, in fact with a total of less than 5,000 lines of matches of 
various types, it couldn't manage if it wasn't for SKIPIFWEIGHT which defeats 
most of the filters about 70% of the time (not possible with ipfiles and 
fromfiles, though they are much leaner than body searches).Just throwing 
out a few ideas.MattRick Hogue wrote:
SMTP is the culprit here. I can shut down declude and the usage is still at
100%.
No DNS changes have been made.
Viruses are being caught at the rate of about 1100 every 3 hours.
Is there any know issue on Imail that you know of on smtp. I am running
version 8.05 


Rick Hogue
www.intent.net Web Hosting 1-800-866-2983
www.prosperity.com Featured web site
 
 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 5:04 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] High CPU usage


  
  Thanks I have disabled both and still have high CPU usage. I run 
inoculate as my virus protection as well but do not think it is really the
problem.

In that case, you can go to the Task Manager, click on the Processes tab,
and then click the CPU button.  That will sort the processes by CPU usage,
with the offender(s) at the top.

  
  I viewed the processes and I am still seeing 40 to 60 simultaneous  
declude calls with the same number of inoculate calls.

Did you make any DNS changes (switching DNS servers in the IMail SMTP
settings, for example)?  That could cause the Declude.exe processes to stay
in memory.

Are viruses getting caught?  If inoculate is not responding, the processes
would stay in memory a long time (and viruses would not get caught).

-Scott
---
Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers
since 2000.
Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver
vulnerability detection.
Find out what you've been missing: Ask for a free 30-day evaluation.

---
[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 PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe
Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found at
http://www.mail-archive.com.
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail".  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


  -- 
=
MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMDOMAINS Failure

2004-04-28 Thread Scott Fisher
I'd be leary of a spamdomain
att.net .airdata.com

If you received e-mail from catt.net, it would fail the above line. I made up 
catt.net, but valid non-ATT domains ending in att.net may exist.

perhaps
mobile.att.net  .airdata.com
@att.net .att.net

or

.att.net.airdata.com
@att.net .att.net

 [EMAIL PROTECTED]  4/28  7:22p 
Hello,
Had a client forward me an e-mail that failed the SPAMDOMAIN test
(along with a couple others).
Below are the internet headers of the SPAMDOMAINs failure (I can
post the full inet headers if desired):

X-RBL-Warning: SPAMDOMAINS: Spamdomain 'att.net' found: Address of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] sent from invalid emhmta02.cdpd.airdata.com.
X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [199.88.234.47]

I have an entry of: att.net  in our spamdomains.txt file.  Now to
add this entry to the spamdomains.txt file, I would make the following
entry, correct?

att.net .airdata.com


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.


---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail.  The archives can be found
at http://www.mail-archive.com.