CBL:Re[3]: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Hi, I've spent hundreds of hours (literally) adjusting the weights and tests, adding sniffer, my own filters, etc to get the highest possible catch rate with the lowest possible false positive rate. I also delete at one weight and hold at a different weight to give me a margin of error. I don't care to get into the specifics of how I have Declude setup, but it has been working great for me the way I have it. If any of the tests I'm using start failing almost every email...there are going to be (and there was) a lot of false positives and there were lots of customer complaints. The spamheaders glitch WAS a BIG DEAL. 2 or 3 points one way or the other makes all the difference. Thanks, Andrew Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thumpernet.com 315-282-0020 Monday, January 3, 2005, 5:29:39 PM, you wrote: >> The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, >> anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the >> test. > But that's forcing admins to comb their logs to find out what test is > malfunctioning, likely with Declude turned off entirely and > management/customers breathing down necks while such forensics are > run. Then add in the additional fact that the "payload" of this bug > would occur on the first day back after the holidays, when there'd be > plenty of other work piled up. > I know it's not yours alone, Scott, but that doesn't sound like a > fully-thought-out position. > --Sandy > > Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist > Broadleaf Systems, a division of > Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! > > http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ > Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail > Aliases! > > http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ > > http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ > --- > [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] 2005 SpamHeaders - Fix
Thanks Barry and Scott... much appreciated! I'm sure all of the customers, on and off of service agreements appreciate you making appropriate versions with fixes available to them. Darin. - Original Message - From: "Barry Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:11 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders - Fix All of the input and suggestions as to how issues like this could be handled has been noted and I thank you for your input We will be posting the updated, fixed .exe on our site tomorrow. For those who have current service agreements please feel free to download it now from the following link. For those who are running an older system without a Service Agreement please email us your version and contact details to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and we will arrange an alternative version. http://www.declude.com/version/182/declude.zip 1. Replace current declude.exe with this declude executable 2. At command prompt go to your IMail Directory 3. Type Declude and enter - it should show version 1.82 Barry --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Why should I need to upgrade when the problem is a bug. I didn't have any problems running the excellent version that I am running at present thank you so should there be a bug fix or do I need to get a service agreement. Let's see :-) _ Glen Harvy Aquarius Communications for all your Internet Needs. Phone 9977 3788 Fax 9977 3844 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ncl Admin > Sent: Tuesday, 4 January 2005 02:51 > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > Importance: High > > > At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: > >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service agreements. > > Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets what > they deserve. > --- > [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.
[Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders - Fix
All of the input and suggestions as to how issues like this could be handled has been noted and I thank you for your input We will be posting the updated, fixed .exe on our site tomorrow. For those who have current service agreements please feel free to download it now from the following link. For those who are running an older system without a Service Agreement please email us your version and contact details to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and we will arrange an alternative version. http://www.declude.com/version/182/declude.zip 1. Replace current declude.exe with this declude executable 2. At command prompt go to your IMail Directory 3. Type Declude and enter - it should show version 1.82 Barry --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Just an FYI, Barry did call me this afternoon, and while the exact approach that they would take wasn't shared, it was clear that he understood the general need. This has only become an issue for us because of the change in how things are released as interims were formerly plentiful, very quick to be published, and Scott had laid down the law concerning his unwillingness to provide documentation for interim releases. Not that long ago there was no such thing as a broadcast announcement (if I recall correctly), and only major issues (bugs and fixes for new important issues such as virus detection) were announced to the list. Now CPHZ has the resources to do all of these things better (broadcast notifications, better documentation, etc.), but this caught them at a stage where they had not yet developed a process to deal with such things, possibly not fully understood the implications, and of course the holiday helped to compound the issue. I was just trying to piece together my opinions in order to influence the decision as to how to implement this. Since they do look at feedback and at least Barry and Scott do monitor this list, I think it's important for people to indicate how they would like to see such things handled. If this was Ipswitch that we were talking about, our expectations would have been to hear virtually nothing until a week or two later when the hotfix came out, and if the issue was not so widespread, expecting a fix would be assuming too much in many cases. My expectation is that the response to the need will be calculated, but obviously not as timely as some of us might have expected. It's probably good that people haven't given up on having high expectations for them like we have for others :) Matt Bill Landry wrote: 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 months ago in interim release x.xx". When bugs are reported to Declude that affect how the product functions, Declude should make it a point to report those issues to its user base, or at least to the list. They should also announce immediately when a bug has been fixed so that we don't sit around twiddling our thumbs waiting for a fix that's been available for two week or two months, or struggling with a problem that's been fixed. I held my tongue on this one, but was quite astounded that Declude did not send out a customer notification immediately after this bug was reported. Especially since this is a test that is enabled by default in the basic global.cfg. I would venture to guess that a lot of people have their tests pretty tightly configured, so that even a small weight addition could trigger hold, or worse, delete actions to be taken. User need to be notified right away about bugs like this so that they can decide if they need to make changes or not. Heck, we even had people thinking that there were problems with JunkMail plug-ins like Sniffer. Would have saved everyone time and frustration had a notification message been sent out immediately to all customers. The other thing that has bothered me about this particular situation is the rationalizing/excuses that have been posted as to why action was not taken sooner. I would feel much better if Declude would have just owned up to the fact that they dropped the ball on this one and promised to do better next time. Oh well, just my unsolicited opinion (they're a dime a dozen, you know)... Bill - Original Message - From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? R. Scott Perry wrote: The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the test. IMO, anything that has a measurable detrimental affect on all systems and all E-mail is very well within the bounds of what needs to be communicated from my perspective, even if it is only scored at one point in a default config. Not even a second thought. My issue was similar to Kami's where I was using the test is combinations to add extra weight, and the bug had the effect of making a false positive with a single test much worse. It would have taken me hours to clean everything up if I had not known about it until this morning. Even regarding other far more minor bugs; I've spent many wasted hours trying to diagnose what was going on with bugs that were already known to Declude. If such information was available to me by list or by site of known issues, I would certainly sav
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
It did affect us throwing weight higher on emails that would not have otherwise failed the Spam Header Filter. We hold on a relatively low weight of 13 compared to other configs I have seen posted with weights of 100, 200, etc. The bottom line is if I did not stroll in here on New Years and catch the posts about the bug, there would have been a lot more of my customer e-mails not getting through due to this. It was not that big a deal for us, and yes I took action and commented out, and now more Spam possibly getting through not reaching same weight we would hold or delete upon. So now I have to possibly adjust another test I guess to make up for it, until the fix? I am monitoring and hoping Sniffer will fill the gap if any. If I had not seen the posts, would the affect for us and our clients have been detrimental? Not really because most of my customers away for holidays too and we are not a huge firm with huge commercial clients. But... if I did have a huge commercial client base - the point of sharing the info and a little advise as a result does seem very prudent. It's not the product, it is communication to me the customer with better warning like "if this bug affects you, do the following until we get it fixed." I guess I am making a mountain out of a mole hill spoiled with great support and communication in the past. But remember this is a primary reason I have always "went out of my way" to praise Declude too! -Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 5:01 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? >1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the >problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a >"hey we know" within 24 hours would've been nice. Yes, that would have been nice. It did take a bit more than 24 hours for an official response on the list. >2. A simple e-mail note to all customers ASAP stating "The spamheaders test >has a bug causing it to catch and add weight to every e-mail sent in 2005. >It is suggested that you comment it out or reduce (or remove) its weight to >avoid false positives. We are working on a fix and will post it to the >website as soon as possible" The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the test. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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. -- CompBiz.Net scanned for 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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
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 months ago in interim release x.xx". When bugs are reported to Declude that affect how the product functions, Declude should make it a point to report those issues to its user base, or at least to the list. They should also announce immediately when a bug has been fixed so that we don't sit around twiddling our thumbs waiting for a fix that's been available for two week or two months, or struggling with a problem that's been fixed. I held my tongue on this one, but was quite astounded that Declude did not send out a customer notification immediately after this bug was reported. Especially since this is a test that is enabled by default in the basic global.cfg. I would venture to guess that a lot of people have their tests pretty tightly configured, so that even a small weight addition could trigger hold, or worse, delete actions to be taken. User need to be notified right away about bugs like this so that they can decide if they need to make changes or not. Heck, we even had people thinking that there were problems with JunkMail plug-ins like Sniffer. Would have saved everyone time and frustration had a notification message been sent out immediately to all customers. The other thing that has bothered me about this particular situation is the rationalizing/excuses that have been posted as to why action was not taken sooner. I would feel much better if Declude would have just owned up to the fact that they dropped the ball on this one and promised to do better next time. Oh well, just my unsolicited opinion (they're a dime a dozen, you know)... Bill - Original Message - From: "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > R. Scott Perry wrote: > > > The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this > > was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to > > be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor > > test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the > > test. > > > IMO, anything that has a measurable detrimental affect on all systems > and all E-mail is very well within the bounds of what needs to be > communicated from my perspective, even if it is only scored at one point > in a default config. Not even a second thought. > > My issue was similar to Kami's where I was using the test is > combinations to add extra weight, and the bug had the effect of making a > false positive with a single test much worse. It would have taken me > hours to clean everything up if I had not known about it until this morning. > > Even regarding other far more minor bugs; I've spent many wasted hours > trying to diagnose what was going on with bugs that were already known > to Declude. If such information was available to me by list or by site > of known issues, I would certainly save myself time and also prevent > other issues from occurring that I wasn't aware of. Take for example > the Subject parsing bug that was discovered with the introduction of > Yahoo's Domain Keys. I had two other people report to me issues with my > GIBBERISHSUB filter because of this bug, and at first when presented > with it, I didn't realize that this was the bug that was reported on > this list until I looked at it for about 15 minutes and suddenly > remembered. So something as minor as the bug that was primarily > affecting only messages from Yahoo, and was mostly only causing issues > with a somewhat common custom filter, in fact had some effect. I'm > afraid that everyone running GIBBERISHSUB right now is scoring the > majority of messages from Yahoo because of this, a fact probably > completely overlooked at Declude when determining what to do with it. > > I think what is best is to allow us to determine what information is > useful and what isn't, but naturally within a reasonable limit. I > consider having access to brief descriptions of all known bugs upon > discovery to be highly valuable, and a time saver for myself as well as > something that will help me improve my QOS. I would prefer this > information to be 'pushed' to me in E-mail, but I would be happy with it > any way that I could get it. If you do decide to push it, you might > want to include the option to join a list for this purpose as part of a > more generalized announcement or in the footer for the listserv. I'll > bet that if made aware of the option, a large number if not most Declude > admins would choose it. > > Matt > > -- > = > MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. > http://www.mailpure.com/software/ >
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
R. Scott Perry wrote: The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the test. IMO, anything that has a measurable detrimental affect on all systems and all E-mail is very well within the bounds of what needs to be communicated from my perspective, even if it is only scored at one point in a default config. Not even a second thought. My issue was similar to Kami's where I was using the test is combinations to add extra weight, and the bug had the effect of making a false positive with a single test much worse. It would have taken me hours to clean everything up if I had not known about it until this morning. Even regarding other far more minor bugs; I've spent many wasted hours trying to diagnose what was going on with bugs that were already known to Declude. If such information was available to me by list or by site of known issues, I would certainly save myself time and also prevent other issues from occurring that I wasn't aware of. Take for example the Subject parsing bug that was discovered with the introduction of Yahoo's Domain Keys. I had two other people report to me issues with my GIBBERISHSUB filter because of this bug, and at first when presented with it, I didn't realize that this was the bug that was reported on this list until I looked at it for about 15 minutes and suddenly remembered. So something as minor as the bug that was primarily affecting only messages from Yahoo, and was mostly only causing issues with a somewhat common custom filter, in fact had some effect. I'm afraid that everyone running GIBBERISHSUB right now is scoring the majority of messages from Yahoo because of this, a fact probably completely overlooked at Declude when determining what to do with it. I think what is best is to allow us to determine what information is useful and what isn't, but naturally within a reasonable limit. I consider having access to brief descriptions of all known bugs upon discovery to be highly valuable, and a time saver for myself as well as something that will help me improve my QOS. I would prefer this information to be 'pushed' to me in E-mail, but I would be happy with it any way that I could get it. If you do decide to push it, you might want to include the option to join a list for this purpose as part of a more generalized announcement or in the footer for the listserv. I'll bet that if made aware of the option, a large number if not most Declude admins would choose it. Matt -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ = --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
On another note... has anyone seen any sort of (cascading?) effect from the SpamHeaders glitch? There aren't any, designed effects. Specifically, all the SPAMHEADERS issue does is causes E-mails to fail the SPAMHEADERS test. That adds weight to the E-mail, and if any actions are performed on the SPAMHEADERS test, they would be performed. But nothing beyond that would occur. So if an E-mail would have failed the SPAMHEADERS test before, nothing different would happen now. Kami mentioned the "cascading effect", which was occurring because of combo tests (for example, a test that fails if both the SPAMHEADERS and ROUTING tests fail). However, that is by design (although the design, of course, does not assume that there will be false positives). I seem to have a fair amount of email winding up in our hold file that failed both our weight tests and an IP hold test. They should have been deleted based on the weight test, but are being held based on the IP hold list. Have you checked the Declude JunkMail log file to see what actions were taken on the E-mail? -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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.
[Declude.JunkMail] [OT] Exchange2Aliases - Nested OU's
I am having problems exporting names from 2 OU's on an exchange server. The directory structure looks like this Admin Building Tech Department Business Department If I enter 'ou="Tech Department",...' I get the message Object not found I tried 'ou="Admin Building",ou='Tech Department' 'ou="Admin Building\Tech Department"' 'ou="Admin Building/Tech Department"' I am sure it is just my lack of LDAP knowledge but what would be the correct way to get the Tech Department users. Thanks. _ Scott Fosseen - Systems Engineer -Prairie Lakes AEA http://fosseen.us/scott _ Judge: You say you're innocent, yet five people swore they saw you steal a watch. Defendant: Your Honor, I can produce 500 people who didn't see me steal it. - actual courtroom testimony _ --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus on the server aea8.k12.ia.us] --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
On another note... has anyone seen any sort of (cascading?) effect from the SpamHeaders glitch? I seem to have a fair amount of email winding up in our hold file that failed both our weight tests and an IP hold test. They should have been deleted based on the weight test, but are being held based on the IP hold list. (Did I explain that in an understandable manner?) Maybe related? Maybe not?? Just a coincidence??? ~Joe --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses at HNB.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] Current Default GLOBAL.CFG
Thanks for your response, Markus but I'd still like to see an answer from CPHZ as to the availability of their recommended Config. They've pretty much worked well for us in the past, I'm not one to re-invent the wheel and there are many here that understand the use of these much better than I. ~Joe - Original Message - From: "J Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 2:08 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Current Default GLOBAL.CFG Will Computer Horizons make the Global Config file available from the web site? Historically this file has had minor changes made to it and I don't always keep up with the newsgroup as well as I would like to. [Believe it or not... email is not the only task in my job descritpion... :)] I'm pretty sure my ipr's are not up to date with the latest recommendations. Also... has a manual installation option been implemented yet?? Have a Wonderful Holiday ~Joe - Original Message - From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 8:29 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Current Default GLOBAL.CFG The latest CLOBAL.CFG is being emailed to you now. Hope this helps Barry -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Geiser Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 9:19 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Current Default GLOBAL.CFG Hello, All, I would like to take a look at the current default GLOBAL.CFG. It used to be linked to from the manual but that link is gone. Can someone tell me where I would go to find that now? Thanks, Dan Geiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- E-mail scanned for viruses by Nexus (http://www.ntgrp.com/mailscan) --- [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. --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses at HNB.com] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses at HNB.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 scanned for viruses at HNB.com] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses at HNB.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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Scott- As usual, the real problem was communications, not the problem itself. Even if it's a minor test, simply acknowledging the problem and letting all current users know - even if the only communication is "Here's a problem we've identified. We are working on it." - goes a log way toward soothing the user base. That is especially true here, where your users have users of our own, and especially when the failure results in false positives, as it did for me. -Dave - Original Message - From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 5:00 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? 1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a "hey we know" within 24 hours would've been nice. Yes, that would have been nice. It did take a bit more than 24 hours for an official response on the list. 2. A simple e-mail note to all customers ASAP stating "The spamheaders test has a bug causing it to catch and add weight to every e-mail sent in 2005. It is suggested that you comment it out or reduce (or remove) its weight to avoid false positives. We are working on a fix and will post it to the website as soon as possible" The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the test. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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.
Re: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
One other comment...We weight it much heavier than you indicate...with very few false positives. It has been a good test for us. Darin. - Original Message - From: "Sanford Whiteman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "R. Scott Perry" Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 5:29 PM Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, > anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the > test. But that's forcing admins to comb their logs to find out what test is malfunctioning, likely with Declude turned off entirely and management/customers breathing down necks while such forensics are run. Then add in the additional fact that the "payload" of this bug would occur on the first day back after the holidays, when there'd be plenty of other work piled up. I know it's not yours alone, Scott, but that doesn't sound like a fully-thought-out position. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ --- [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] ETA for SPAMHEADERS glitch
>Part of the reason for the delay (aside from it first being reported on a >holiday during a weekend) was that the fix involves changing old source >code, which is something that has never been done with Declude before. In >the past, when issues such as this were detected, a change would be made to >the latest code (v2.0b in this case). However, management made the >decision that it would be in the best interest for everyone to make the >change to the 1.81 as well, which requires a more complicated procedure for >implementing the change. Sounds like an excellent plan for all customers. Thanks Scott and Barry. Darin. --- [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[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
> The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, > anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the > test. But that's forcing admins to comb their logs to find out what test is malfunctioning, likely with Declude turned off entirely and management/customers breathing down necks while such forensics are run. Then add in the additional fact that the "payload" of this bug would occur on the first day back after the holidays, when there'd be plenty of other work piled up. I know it's not yours alone, Scott, but that doesn't sound like a fully-thought-out position. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Well said. Best Regards Andy Schmidt H&M Systems Software, Inc. 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of marc catuogno Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 04:50 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? Scott, I have been and still am a very satisfied Declude customer. I wasn't looking for a faster fix, or an interim release, I didn't even want to complain, just: 1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a "hey we know" within 24 hours would've been nice. 2. A simple e-mail note to all customers ASAP stating "The spamheaders test has a bug causing it to catch and add weight to every e-mail sent in 2005. It is suggested that you comment it out or reduce (or remove) its weight to avoid false positives. We are working on a fix and will post it to the website as soon as possible" I don't want to argue numbers or percentages or how significant the test is in scope of catching spam - 15% is significant enough should it cause an e-mail to be held or deleted. I would hate to have to tell someone that their sales lead is gone because of a program glitch. That's all. Maybe a group e-mail bugtrack @ d .com or something that people can subscribe to or something. I just know that I would've been pissed had I not checked the list and shut off the test and was never notified. Maybe I am spoiled by how proactive Declude has been in the past. Marc --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a "hey we know" within 24 hours would've been nice. Yes, that would have been nice. It did take a bit more than 24 hours for an official response on the list. 2. A simple e-mail note to all customers ASAP stating "The spamheaders test has a bug causing it to catch and add weight to every e-mail sent in 2005. It is suggested that you comment it out or reduce (or remove) its weight to avoid false positives. We are working on a fix and will post it to the website as soon as possible" The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the test. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Scott, I have been and still am a very satisfied Declude customer. I wasn't looking for a faster fix, or an interim release, I didn't even want to complain, just: 1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a "hey we know" within 24 hours would've been nice. 2. A simple e-mail note to all customers ASAP stating "The spamheaders test has a bug causing it to catch and add weight to every e-mail sent in 2005. It is suggested that you comment it out or reduce (or remove) its weight to avoid false positives. We are working on a fix and will post it to the website as soon as possible" I don't want to argue numbers or percentages or how significant the test is in scope of catching spam - 15% is significant enough should it cause an e-mail to be held or deleted. I would hate to have to tell someone that their sales lead is gone because of a program glitch. That's all. Maybe a group e-mail bugtrack @ d .com or something that people can subscribe to or something. I just know that I would've been pissed had I not checked the list and shut off the test and was never notified. Maybe I am spoiled by how proactive Declude has been in the past. Marc -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 4:02 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? >I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement about >the Spam >Header test being broken officially from Declude, more timely, and along >with advice what to do in the interim. This is not the same Declude >operation to me as in years past! FWIW, it was handled very similarly to how I would have handled it. I consider the SPAMHEADERS test to be a very minor test, as it did not catch a large amount of spam (about 8% when we last tested), and had a significant amount of false positives. As a result, we only counted SPAMHEADERS towards 15% of the default spam detection weight. The test can easily be commented out to prevent it from running. Yes, in the past, I could have come out with an interim version more quickly. However, it should also be noted that there was always a lot of debate about the interims; many people did not like them. And even so, I would have only come out with an interim for the latest version (in this case, a beta), which would not have provided any options for customers who can only run release versions. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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 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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Hi Scott: It is fine- when this happened I was out of the office and since we use a number of combo filters this one filter misbehaving triggered a lot of other tests which then had a cascade effect. Of course when I found out we had 100 messages tagged as spam which are were sent back to the addresses and now the test is commented.. But with combination filters it is no longer a single incident as it can have a cascading effect. Any news on the 2.0b update? Regards, Kami -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 4:02 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? >I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement >about the Spam Header test being broken officially from Declude, more >timely, and along with advice what to do in the interim. This is not >the same Declude operation to me as in years past! FWIW, it was handled very similarly to how I would have handled it. I consider the SPAMHEADERS test to be a very minor test, as it did not catch a large amount of spam (about 8% when we last tested), and had a significant amount of false positives. As a result, we only counted SPAMHEADERS towards 15% of the default spam detection weight. The test can easily be commented out to prevent it from running. Yes, in the past, I could have come out with an interim version more quickly. However, it should also be noted that there was always a lot of debate about the interims; many people did not like them. And even so, I would have only come out with an interim for the latest version (in this case, a beta), which would not have provided any options for customers who can only run release versions. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement about the Spam Header test being broken officially from Declude, more timely, and along with advice what to do in the interim. This is not the same Declude operation to me as in years past! FWIW, it was handled very similarly to how I would have handled it. I consider the SPAMHEADERS test to be a very minor test, as it did not catch a large amount of spam (about 8% when we last tested), and had a significant amount of false positives. As a result, we only counted SPAMHEADERS towards 15% of the default spam detection weight. The test can easily be commented out to prevent it from running. Yes, in the past, I could have come out with an interim version more quickly. However, it should also be noted that there was always a lot of debate about the interims; many people did not like them. And even so, I would have only come out with an interim for the latest version (in this case, a beta), which would not have provided any options for customers who can only run release versions. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I'm in the same situation. I would hope for some sort of free bug fix. Perhaps release bug fixed versions of a few old versions could work? -Dan At 03:19 PM 1/3/2005, you wrote: I think Jerry has this right. Both our Declude and IMail support agreements are currently lapsed. We were planning on renewing both in early 2005 when Ipswitch had their big fiasco over discontinuing IMail as a stand-alone program. So we plan on dropping IMail and we postponed renewing the Declude support contract. I'm sure that if we switch to SmarterMail that we'll renew the Declude contract, but that could be months out. In the meanwhile, we were happy with our current version of Declude until this bug popped up. Since this is a major bug, I consider Declude responsible. I'll be interested to see what they do. --- [This E-mail http://www.cayugacomputers.com/ccvds.html";>scanned for viruses 01/03/2005 16:07:01] --- [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] Notification Policy...
> The urgent list you are referring to was for urgent virus > notices, of which since inception there was only one use. I've considered this list not virus- or junkmail-specific. Maybe my mistake. It wasn't even specific to Declude Virus. The reason for the list was that there was a rash of new viruses, and there were concerns about blocking the viruses before the virus definitions were updated. The "virusalert" list for Declude Virus was added to let people know ASAP of new viruses, before virus definitions were available. The idea was that an initial alert would get sent out as soon as we detected that a major new virus was released, with a second E-mail including more details. Since no AV company supplied such a thing (they typically report all new viruses, and send the information hours after the virus starts spreading), it seemed like it would be very useful. But as soon as we created the list, the viruses died down almost immediately, so as John pointed out, it was only used once. -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 outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
We are up-to-date with our support agreements way into 2005 and I am awaiting a fix. I am not sure I understand the talk here about forced license upgrade unless a customer support agreement has expired? I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement about the Spam Header test being broken officially from Declude, more timely, and along with advice what to do in the interim. This is not the same Declude operation to me as in years past! -Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Imail Admin Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:20 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? I think Jerry has this right. Both our Declude and IMail support agreements are currently lapsed. We were planning on renewing both in early 2005 when Ipswitch had their big fiasco over discontinuing IMail as a stand-alone program. So we plan on dropping IMail and we postponed renewing the Declude support contract. I'm sure that if we switch to SmarterMail that we'll renew the Declude contract, but that could be months out. In the meanwhile, we were happy with our current version of Declude until this bug popped up. Since this is a major bug, I consider Declude responsible. I'll be interested to see what they do. Actually, I could think of one compromise solution: release an update/fixed version, require a support contract for the download, but offer (for a limited time) a substantial discount on the support contract. Or, if you don't like that, then offer a short-term support contract (three months for one quarter of the usual price). I really am a big fan of Declude; I just don't like being forced into an upgrade. Ben BC Web - Original Message - From: "Jerry Murdock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude has never been > presented as being a "time sensitive" licensed product. > > I know some of my old installs are still probably using older versions > without other issues. I've made my successors aware of this and it's up > to them now. > > There are a lot of folks out there that will be looking for an iMail > replacement, and may consider Smartermail/Declude, but won't if they feel > CPHZ is not doing right. CPHZ should release a 1.82 or a 1.8101 and make > it available for all licensed users. They would then get a "phone home" > version out to more users, and generate good will instead of ill will. > > I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't chimed in already that this > is just a way to force an upgrade. I don't believe that, but some will be > thinking it. > > Jerry > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ncl Admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:51 AM > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > > > > At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: > > >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service > agreements. > > > > Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets > what > > they deserve. > > --- > > [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. > --- [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. -- CompBiz.Net scanned for 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] ETA for SPAMHEADERS glitch
Well I just made a post, and this is the post I was expecting/looking for. Thanks Scott! -Don -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:34 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] ETA for SPAMHEADERS glitch Just to let everyone know, we have identified the issue with the SPAMHEADERS test. As most people realized, most E-mails sent with a date involving a year after 2004 were failing the SPAMHEADERS test. For those that are interested in the details, if the SPAMHEADERS code matches the bitmask 0x4800, it means that an invalid year was detected for the SPAMHEADERS test. Normally, a code such as 0x4802 would be seen, but others such as 0xC0001802 could also be seen. And I feel that it is only fair for me to point out that this glitch was in code that I wrote (several years ago, actually). We expect to have a v1.82 ready by tomorrow morning that takes care of this issue. Part of the reason for the delay (aside from it first being reported on a holiday during a weekend) was that the fix involves changing old source code, which is something that has never been done with Declude before. In the past, when issues such as this were detected, a change would be made to the latest code (v2.0b in this case). However, management made the decision that it would be in the best interest for everyone to make the change to the 1.81 as well, which requires a more complicated procedure for implementing the change. This outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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. -- CompBiz.Net scanned for 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] Notification Policy...
> The urgent list you are referring to was for urgent virus > notices, of which since inception there was only one use. I've considered this list not virus- or junkmail-specific. Maybe my mistake. Markus --- [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] ETA for SPAMHEADERS glitch
Damnit Scott, you just took all the fun out of complaining. :) Thanks for the info, Sam R. Scott Perry wrote: Just to let everyone know, we have identified the issue with the SPAMHEADERS test. As most people realized, most E-mails sent with a date involving a year after 2004 were failing the SPAMHEADERS test. For those that are interested in the details, if the SPAMHEADERS code matches the bitmask 0x4800, it means that an invalid year was detected for the SPAMHEADERS test. Normally, a code such as 0x4802 would be seen, but others such as 0xC0001802 could also be seen. And I feel that it is only fair for me to point out that this glitch was in code that I wrote (several years ago, actually). We expect to have a v1.82 ready by tomorrow morning that takes care of this issue. Part of the reason for the delay (aside from it first being reported on a holiday during a weekend) was that the fix involves changing old source code, which is something that has never been done with Declude before. In the past, when issues such as this were detected, a change would be made to the latest code (v2.0b in this case). However, management made the decision that it would be in the best interest for everyone to make the change to the 1.81 as well, which requires a more complicated procedure for implementing the change. This outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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. -- S.J.Stanaitis Network Administrator, Decorative Product Source http://www.dpsource.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (877)-650-8054 x160 --- [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] ETA for SPAMHEADERS glitch
Just to let everyone know, we have identified the issue with the SPAMHEADERS test. As most people realized, most E-mails sent with a date involving a year after 2004 were failing the SPAMHEADERS test. For those that are interested in the details, if the SPAMHEADERS code matches the bitmask 0x4800, it means that an invalid year was detected for the SPAMHEADERS test. Normally, a code such as 0x4802 would be seen, but others such as 0xC0001802 could also be seen. And I feel that it is only fair for me to point out that this glitch was in code that I wrote (several years ago, actually). We expect to have a v1.82 ready by tomorrow morning that takes care of this issue. Part of the reason for the delay (aside from it first being reported on a holiday during a weekend) was that the fix involves changing old source code, which is something that has never been done with Declude before. In the past, when issues such as this were detected, a change would be made to the latest code (v2.0b in this case). However, management made the decision that it would be in the best interest for everyone to make the change to the 1.81 as well, which requires a more complicated procedure for implementing the change. This outgoing message is guaranteed to be authentic by Message Level users. Guarantee the authenticity of your email @ http://www.messagelevel.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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I think Jerry has this right. Both our Declude and IMail support agreements are currently lapsed. We were planning on renewing both in early 2005 when Ipswitch had their big fiasco over discontinuing IMail as a stand-alone program. So we plan on dropping IMail and we postponed renewing the Declude support contract. I'm sure that if we switch to SmarterMail that we'll renew the Declude contract, but that could be months out. In the meanwhile, we were happy with our current version of Declude until this bug popped up. Since this is a major bug, I consider Declude responsible. I'll be interested to see what they do. Actually, I could think of one compromise solution: release an update/fixed version, require a support contract for the download, but offer (for a limited time) a substantial discount on the support contract. Or, if you don't like that, then offer a short-term support contract (three months for one quarter of the usual price). I really am a big fan of Declude; I just don't like being forced into an upgrade. Ben BC Web - Original Message - From: "Jerry Murdock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:22 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude has never been > presented as being a "time sensitive" licensed product. > > I know some of my old installs are still probably using older versions > without other issues. I've made my successors aware of this and it's up > to them now. > > There are a lot of folks out there that will be looking for an iMail > replacement, and may consider Smartermail/Declude, but won't if they feel > CPHZ is not doing right. CPHZ should release a 1.82 or a 1.8101 and make > it available for all licensed users. They would then get a "phone home" > version out to more users, and generate good will instead of ill will. > > I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't chimed in already that this > is just a way to force an upgrade. I don't believe that, but some will be > thinking it. > > Jerry > > > - Original Message - > From: "Ncl Admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:51 AM > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > > > > At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: > > >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service > agreements. > > > > Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets > what > > they deserve. > > --- > > [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. > --- [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] Notification Policy...
The urgent list you are referring to was for urgent virus notices, of which since inception there was only one use. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 12:13 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification Policy... > > Over a year ago I've asked several times to set up a separate mailing list > (I believe it was [EMAIL PROTECTED]) where ONLY urgent messages can > be sent to the subscribers. > > Simple rules: > - no questions => existing lists > - no discussion => existing lists > - no opinion=> existing lists > - only things admins should know immediatly > > ...so everyone can configure his own notification plan. In my case a program > alias who sends me an SMS, other would prefer pagers or something else. > > At a certain point Scott has set up this urgent-list but as I can remember > it was not public and even if I subscribbed immediatly there was not a > single message sent to this list. (at least I can't remember) > > Markus > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:03 PM > > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification Policy... > > > > Pete: > > > > Barry made a post to the Sniffer list but as far as I know > > there has not been a notification to Declude Customers. When > > there is a major glitch in a program like this, I would > > expect to be notified by the Vendor immediately. > > Users are finding out from peer lists about this problem > > which was first reported on Saturday. Not all users are on > > these lists or they do not monitor them. > > > > I think this is a good opportunity for the Management at > > Declude to develop a notification policy. > > > > Chuck Schick > > Warp 8, Inc. > > (303)-421-5140 > > www.warp8.com > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil > > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:50 AM > > To: Marc Catuogno > > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer > > Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test > > > > > > On Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:30:22 AM, Marc wrote: > > > > MC> I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer > > MC> forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 > > MC> hours after the first post discussing this bug and there > > is still > > MC> no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. > > > > I saw a note from Barry... maybe you don't have it yet? > > _M > > > > > > > > --- > > [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. > > > > > > > --- > [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] Notification Policy...
Over a year ago I've asked several times to set up a separate mailing list (I believe it was [EMAIL PROTECTED]) where ONLY urgent messages can be sent to the subscribers. Simple rules: - no questions => existing lists - no discussion => existing lists - no opinion=> existing lists - only things admins should know immediatly ...so everyone can configure his own notification plan. In my case a program alias who sends me an SMS, other would prefer pagers or something else. At a certain point Scott has set up this urgent-list but as I can remember it was not public and even if I subscribbed immediatly there was not a single message sent to this list. (at least I can't remember) Markus > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chuck Schick > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 6:03 PM > To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification Policy... > > Pete: > > Barry made a post to the Sniffer list but as far as I know > there has not been a notification to Declude Customers. When > there is a major glitch in a program like this, I would > expect to be notified by the Vendor immediately. > Users are finding out from peer lists about this problem > which was first reported on Saturday. Not all users are on > these lists or they do not monitor them. > > I think this is a good opportunity for the Management at > Declude to develop a notification policy. > > Chuck Schick > Warp 8, Inc. > (303)-421-5140 > www.warp8.com > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:50 AM > To: Marc Catuogno > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer > Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test > > > On Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:30:22 AM, Marc wrote: > > MC> I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer > MC> forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 > MC> hours after the first post discussing this bug and there > is still > MC> no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. > > I saw a note from Barry... maybe you don't have it yet? > _M > > > > --- > [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. > > --- [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] OT: Comcast Mail Problem...
Declude/Imail Gurus, We have been seeing a problem, almost exclusively with comcast.net for about three months now. It's one of those intermittent problems that Mail Admins love. This may be a Imail problem, but I thought I'd check here first. Every so often (every couple days, weeks), at random times, a couple of Comcast messages will fail to send to the remote server. Messages sent two minutes before might be sent ok, and messages sent four minutes later will send without a problem. The oddest part of this is the lack of attempt to connect to the remote mail server. As you can see from the log entries it just automatically creates a Postmaster Rejection message. 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(91DD00AC) [X.X.X.X] connect X.X.X.X port 3943 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(91DD00AC) [X.X.X.X] EHLO engineering 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(0894) Authenticated [EMAIL PROTECTED], session treated as local. 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(91DD00AC) [X.X.X.X] MAIL FROM: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(91DD00AC) [X.X.X.X] RCPT TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 12:30 14:29 SMTPD(91DD00AC) [X.X.X.X] C:\IMail\spool\D813791dd00acde5c.SMD 3152 12:30 14:29 SMTP-(1120) processing C:\IMail\spool\Q813791dd00acde5c.SMD 12:30 14:29 SMTP-(1120) Creating message from Postmaster 12:30 14:29 SMTP-(1120) finished C:\IMail\spool\Q813791dd00acde5c.SMD status=2 Environment: Windows 2003 on Dual Pentium 4 2.8 GHz 1 GB RAM 2 X 36 GB Hard Drive (Mirrored) Declude 1.81 Thanks in advance! --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
That's exactly what I have done. I am definitely seeing more spam as a result of this problem. If I knew they were planning to fix it in a day or two, I'd live with it. Since we did hear from Barry something to the effect of "an announcement will made Monday morning" I am waiting to make a decision whether to increase some other tests by a point or so to compensate. -d - Original Message - From: "Harry Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 1:21 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? Why not just set the SPAMHEADERS weight to zero in GLOBAL.CFG as a workaround until the problem is fixed by a new release? --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Why not just set the SPAMHEADERS weight to zero in GLOBAL.CFG as a workaround until the problem is fixed by a new release? --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I think somebody already mentioned it. -d - Original Message - From: "Jerry Murdock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:22 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude has never been presented as being a "time sensitive" licensed product. I know some of my old installs are still probably using older versions without other issues. I've made my successors aware of this and it's up to them now. There are a lot of folks out there that will be looking for an iMail replacement, and may consider Smartermail/Declude, but won't if they feel CPHZ is not doing right. CPHZ should release a 1.82 or a 1.8101 and make it available for all licensed users. They would then get a "phone home" version out to more users, and generate good will instead of ill will. I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't chimed in already that this is just a way to force an upgrade. I don't believe that, but some will be thinking it. Jerry - Original Message - From: "Ncl Admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:51 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service agreements. Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets what they deserve. --- [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. --- [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[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test
Hi, I have a support contract, I'm NOT one of those inexperienced users, and I DO primarily rely on the list for info. Anyway you slice it, no notice from Declude about the issue (we figured it out on our own the hard way when customers started complaining) and I confirmed there was an issue via the listserv. Thanks, Andrew Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thumpernet.com 315-282-0020 Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:48:21 AM, you wrote: > IMO, let CPHZ decide how they want to handle their customers, and > let the customers decide how to handle CPHZ. > Things have already been said, and similar feelings are shared > among many others, but I don't know that they have developed an > understanding yet of the importance of 24/7/365 problem resolution for > software that holds the keys to over a million E-mail accounts, nor > the need to not only notify, but be clear and descriptive despite the > perception that such things are beyond the average user, and of course > better embrace the power users that have been a core element of the > product's development and troubleshooting over the past few years. > Barry is a self admitted non-tech and his focus is clearly more so > on the back office and marketing, somewhat of a 180 degree switch from > before. Both approaches have their drawbacks and most greatly impact > the power user due to increased separation from development processes, > less direct answers, and a perception of needs based on those that > contact support instead of participating in listservs (a big mistake > IMO to drive functionality primarily by the needs of the least > experienced users). I don't expect to have everything the way that I > would like to see it. Barry is clearly a nice guy, but he got into > this business without an understanding of even mail server > administration, and his early choices/focus has reflected this fact. > They appear to be learning aspects of our side of things, and Scott is > still providing some input to the process, but I'm afraid that they > might need to trip up a few times to understand the deep complexities > on this side of the business. Not needing to trip up would of course > be best, but this isn't typically how people learn deep appreciation. > Gentle prodding IMO is the best method...unless of course you are > talking about Ipswitch in which case I call them names and repeatedly > describe how crooked they have become :) > Matt > Marc Catuogno wrote: > I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the > sniffer forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 > hours after the first post discussing this bug and there is still no > e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. > > -Original Message- > From:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim Matuska > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:02 AM > To:sniffer@SortMonster.com > Subject: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders > test > Has anything changed recently in the format of the sniffer > notification messages? I am noticing all the notifications for the > last few days have been failing decludes spamheaders test, this hasn't > happened before. > > Jim Matuska Jr. > Computer Tech2, CCNA > Nez Perce Tribe > Information Systems > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --- [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] Notification Policy...
I would like to receive notifications such notifications of all know issues, or at least have a special section on their site for things that aren't as widespread as this. That way it would save me time in diagnosing and reporting issues that were already known, and of course alert me to others that I might not be aware of. This has happened repeatedly to me in the past, though this list has been a great resource if you can keep up with it. The issues go back to the repeated requests under the old system related to changes in the interim releases which were primarily bug fixes. I accepted the reasons for the policy then (resources and process related), and I expect that at some point it would change, though I also accept that CPHZ has a full plate with movement to a GUI-based install, being forced to prioritize the move to other MTA's, learning everything they can from Scott, and of course managing their customer base. Issues like this kind of bring unwanted focus to such pre-existing shortcomings that hadn't yet floated to the top. This also brings further untimely attention to the perceived need for a minor version release policy, something like what IMail has where bugs are fixed in x.xx releases and new functionality is minimally a x.x release. For the time being it appears that most bug fixes are merely a part of versions primarily related to new functionality, though they broke with that for the JPG vulnerability fix in 1.81 and now seemingly with this, but I don't expect to see the more minor things also fixed in this release. Again, I don't expect dramatic change overnight, but I would be very happy to see this on their roadmap as soon as it fits appropriately in the priorities. Matt Sanford Whiteman wrote: I think this is a good opportunity for the Management at Declude to develop a notification policy. Quite so. This is getting less Gee-golly-Scott-must-be-on-vacation and more Something-must-be-done. There should be a security/stability notification list, separate from the support list, started up promptly. Right now, we're getting even less transparency than we get from Microsoft; in fact, the MS bulletins provide ample templates for [EMAIL PROTECTED]. --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ --- [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/ =
Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification Policy...
> I think this is a good opportunity for the Management at Declude to > develop a notification policy. Quite so. This is getting less Gee-golly-Scott-must-be-on-vacation and more Something-must-be-done. There should be a security/stability notification list, separate from the support list, started up promptly. Right now, we're getting even less transparency than we get from Microsoft; in fact, the MS bulletins provide ample templates for [EMAIL PROTECTED] --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/release/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/download/release/ http://www.mailmage.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/download/release/ --- [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] Notification Policy...
Pete: Barry made a post to the Sniffer list but as far as I know there has not been a notification to Declude Customers. When there is a major glitch in a program like this, I would expect to be notified by the Vendor immediately. Users are finding out from peer lists about this problem which was first reported on Saturday. Not all users are on these lists or they do not monitor them. I think this is a good opportunity for the Management at Declude to develop a notification policy. Chuck Schick Warp 8, Inc. (303)-421-5140 www.warp8.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pete McNeil Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 9:50 AM To: Marc Catuogno Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test On Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:30:22 AM, Marc wrote: MC> I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer MC> forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 MC> hours after the first post discussing this bug and there is still MC> no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. I saw a note from Barry... maybe you don't have it yet? _M --- [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] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test
IMO, let CPHZ decide how they want to handle their customers, and let the customers decide how to handle CPHZ. Things have already been said, and similar feelings are shared among many others, but I don't know that they have developed an understanding yet of the importance of 24/7/365 problem resolution for software that holds the keys to over a million E-mail accounts, nor the need to not only notify, but be clear and descriptive despite the perception that such things are beyond the average user, and of course better embrace the power users that have been a core element of the product's development and troubleshooting over the past few years. Barry is a self admitted non-tech and his focus is clearly more so on the back office and marketing, somewhat of a 180 degree switch from before. Both approaches have their drawbacks and most greatly impact the power user due to increased separation from development processes, less direct answers, and a perception of needs based on those that contact support instead of participating in listservs (a big mistake IMO to drive functionality primarily by the needs of the least experienced users). I don't expect to have everything the way that I would like to see it. Barry is clearly a nice guy, but he got into this business without an understanding of even mail server administration, and his early choices/focus has reflected this fact. They appear to be learning aspects of our side of things, and Scott is still providing some input to the process, but I'm afraid that they might need to trip up a few times to understand the deep complexities on this side of the business. Not needing to trip up would of course be best, but this isn't typically how people learn deep appreciation. Gentle prodding IMO is the best method...unless of course you are talking about Ipswitch in which case I call them names and repeatedly describe how crooked they have become :) Matt Marc Catuogno wrote: I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 hours after the first post discussing this bug and there is still no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Jim Matuska Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:02 AM To: sniffer@SortMonster.com Subject: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test Has anything changed recently in the format of the sniffer notification messages? I am noticing all the notifications for the last few days have been failing decludes spamheaders test, this hasn't happened before. Jim Matuska Jr. Computer Tech2, CCNA Nez Perce Tribe Information Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ =
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test
On Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:30:22 AM, Marc wrote: MC> I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the MC> sniffer forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is MC> almost 48 hours after the first post discussing this bug and MC> there is still no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has MC> gone out. I saw a note from Barry... maybe you don't have it yet? _M --- [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] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test
Hi, The inevitable in light of new management? Thanks, Andrew Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.thumpernet.com 315-282-0020 Monday, January 3, 2005, 11:30:22 AM, you wrote: > I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer > forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 hours > after the first post discussing this bug and there is still no e-mail > from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim Matuska > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:02 AM > To: sniffer@SortMonster.com > Subject: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test > Has anything changed recently in the format of the sniffer > notification messages? I am noticing all the notifications for the > last few days have been failing decludes spamheaders test, this hasn't > happened before. > > Jim Matuska Jr. > Computer Tech2, CCNA > Nez Perce Tribe > Information Systems > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --- [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] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude has never been presented as being a "time sensitive" licensed product. I know some of my old installs are still probably using older versions without other issues. I've made my successors aware of this and it's up to them now. There are a lot of folks out there that will be looking for an iMail replacement, and may consider Smartermail/Declude, but won't if they feel CPHZ is not doing right. CPHZ should release a 1.82 or a 1.8101 and make it available for all licensed users. They would then get a "phone home" version out to more users, and generate good will instead of ill will. I'm surprised the conspiracy theorists haven't chimed in already that this is just a way to force an upgrade. I don't believe that, but some will be thinking it. Jerry - Original Message - From: "Ncl Admin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:51 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch? > At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: > >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service agreements. > > Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets what > they deserve. > --- > [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.
[Declude.JunkMail] FW: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test
I don't mean to be a nag but this was just posted to the sniffer forum and is exactly what I was talking about. It is almost 48 hours after the first post discussing this bug and there is still no e-mail from Declude that I am aware of that has gone out. -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Jim MatuskaSent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:02 AMTo: sniffer@SortMonster.comSubject: [sniffer] Sniffer Notifications now failing declude spamheaders test Has anything changed recently in the format of the sniffer notification messages? I am noticing all the notifications for the last few days have been failing decludes spamheaders test, this hasn't happened before. Jim Matuska Jr.Computer Tech2, CCNANez Perce TribeInformation Systems[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote: >Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service agreements. Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets what they deserve. --- [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.
