[Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20HOLD WEIGHT30DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20HOLD WEIGHT30DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
I've run into this problem too. My solution was to setup another delete test two points lower than your original delete test. So with a WEIGHT30 test, setup a WEIGHT28 test with the action of delete. I don't know how reliable it is, but it worked for me. Jason - Original Message - From: Fritz Squib [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:42 AM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Nope, not using that either. Fritz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:11 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
One of the best things to try is to stop using WEIGHT and use WEIGHTRANGE. This is much more precise in action handling. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:23 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Nope, not using that either. Fritz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:11 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with 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. --- [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
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
John, If all I want to do is: WEIGHT10 ATTACH WEIGHT40 DELETE Are you suggesting that I change that to: WEIGHT1039 ATTACH WEIGHT40DELETE Where WEIGHT1039 is a weightrange and the rest are weights. If so why is your suggestion more precise? Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists) Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:56 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE One of the best things to try is to stop using WEIGHT and use WEIGHTRANGE. This is much more precise in action handling. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:23 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Nope, not using that either. Fritz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:11 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz Frederick P. Squib, Jr. Network Operations/Mail Administrator Citizens Telephone Company of Kecksburg http://www.wpa.net () ascii ribbon campaign - against html email /\- against microsoft attachments --- [This E-mail scanned by Citizens Internet Services with Declude
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
I had a similar problem with 2.0.4, in my case I had multiple DELETE actions like the following: WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT25 DELETE WEIGHT30 DELETE The solution that worked in my case was to remove (simply comment out) the extra DELETE WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT25 DELETE #WEIGHT30 DELETE I don't know if this is your case and if it is true also with latest version as I didn't check further. --- Franco Celli - Original Message - From: Fritz Squib [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE --- [Quipo ISP - Questa E-mail e' stata controllata dal programma Declude Virus] [Quipo ISP - This E-mail was 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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Goran, It's more precise because when you have two WEIGHTS that overlap Declude will evaluate the actions of both and pick the one with the highest programmed action. When you use the weight range option than there is no conflict of actions since your weight ranges would not conflict. Darrell Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. Goran Jovanovic writes: John, If all I want to do is: WEIGHT10 ATTACH WEIGHT40 DELETE Are you suggesting that I change that to: WEIGHT1039 ATTACH WEIGHT40DELETE Where WEIGHT1039 is a weightrange and the rest are weights. If so why is your suggestion more precise? Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists) Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:56 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE One of the best things to try is to stop using WEIGHT and use WEIGHTRANGE. This is much more precise in action handling. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:23 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Nope, not using that either. Fritz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:11 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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] Declude 2 and DELETE
I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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] Junkmail Syntax
Kyle, From the system documentation written by Scott Perry. IGNORE This action does not do anything (aside from log that the E-mail failed the test). Same as the LOG action. LOG This action does not do anything (aside from log that the E-mail failed the test). Same as the IGNORE action. David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kyle Fisher Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 4:00 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Junkmail Syntax In the Junkmail file you have DELETE, HOLD, WARN, IGNORE. What does IGNORE actually do? Kyle __ NOD32 1.1011 (20050228) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.nod32.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] Declude 2 and DELETE
The latest version of Declude is indeed working very well. As in anything else in life, there is no such thing as perfect. This bug is apparently as the result of customer requests, in that Declude customers were requesting multiple actions and different actions for different users. Remember people, declude.exe started off being a simple yet powerful tool in the war on spam. I highly doubt Scott could have fore sought all of the added functions and features that are now present or are planned. As such, the code could not have been written with planning for all of those features and functions. Come on now, how many of us and had to go back and redo/undo work that we did one/two/three years ago because what we have to do now is changed and to make it work we have to make changes to work we did in the past. Remember, the Subject line bug did not come to light until Earthlink and Gmail started using a new software that started putting in lines in the header that no one had seen before. As for the question of using WEIGHTRANGE over WEIGHT, any time you can take steps to be more precise in defining what it is you intend to do will help to reduce possible problems down the line. Using WEIGHTRANGE will help you to clearly understand and change your intention into actual commands as it leaves less room for mistakes and overlaps. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
We have deployed 2.0.5 as well using the manual. We have had it running for well over a week now and have not seen any issues at all. Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
How have your logs been Darrell? When I was running it (I've since gone back to 1.82) I noticed lots more log corruption - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE We have deployed 2.0.5 as well using the manual. We have had it running for well over a week now and have not seen any issues at all. Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
This is how you would setup a weight range with the last one being a weight to place an action on all emails with a weight over that weight. SPAM-LOWweightrange x x 8 13 SPAM-MEDweightrange x x 14 24 SPAM-HIGH weight x x 25 0 Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:12 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE John, If all I want to do is: WEIGHT10 ATTACH WEIGHT40 DELETE Are you suggesting that I change that to: WEIGHT1039 ATTACH WEIGHT40DELETE Where WEIGHT1039 is a weightrange and the rest are weights. If so why is your suggestion more precise? Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists) Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:56 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE One of the best things to try is to stop using WEIGHT and use WEIGHTRANGE. This is much more precise in action handling. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 6:23 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Nope, not using that either. Fritz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:11 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE I should confirm my post... By the catchall account, I'm referring to the Copy All Mail enabled setting in IMAIL. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:04 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE What exactly is the problem with the catchall account, and when is a fix expected? We haven't yet upgraded to 2.0 because of the periodic mention of problems with it on this list, but would like to as soon as all known issues are resolved. We don't have many nobody aliases, but we haven't been able to convince a couple of customers to remove them yet. Darin. - Original Message - From: Erik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Fritz, We've experienced the same problem as you and for us, it was narrowed down to the catchall account in Imail. If you have a catchall account in the Imail setup, Declude will not work correctly. After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. Also, Decludes' COMFIRM.CFG does not work correctly either when there is a catchall account. The local Declude will intercept any confirmation email that going to another Imail/Declude Confirm system (thus the email never reaches it's intended source. Again, response from Declude was: it's not a high priority. Erik -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:42 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20 weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30 weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20 HOLD WEIGHT30 DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE
At 11:20 AM 3/1/2005 -0500, Goran Jovanovic wrote: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? Instead of deleting bad messages which exceed my weight it captured them. Then I have to hand process all of them. It also got a zillion of them going to my catchall account which are normally not there so it was double the trouble so to speak. I have to hand process everything between my weight range of hold and delete to make sure that false positives are not just deleted. I also then block spam ip's while I do it which really cuts down on the next batch. I did send a low priority ticket to declude, as far as I am concerned I did the auto install and if it needed to fix things from weight to weightrange it should have done it. I haven't really currently got the time to re-do my settings. But might take a look at it in the near future but I am moving from Imail to Smartermail so not sure I should allocate the time. Jay [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot] --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Scott, I have not seen too much log corruption yet. In fact watching the logs scroll by it seems to be better than what we seen under earlier versions. Specially since the logs are not interleaved (I like that). We are running logs in excess of 600MB. I will have a better answer once I kick off all the monthly processing of logs. Darrell Scott Fisher writes: How have your logs been Darrell? When I was running it (I've since gone back to 1.82) I noticed lots more log corruption - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE We have deployed 2.0.5 as well using the manual. We have had it running for well over a week now and have not seen any issues at all. Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Hi, Oh, so it's NOT just me. Yes, there we virtually no corruptions before my upgrade from 1.82 to 2.04 - now they are plentiful. Best Regards Andy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Fisher Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:37 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE How have your logs been Darrell? When I was running it (I've since gone back to 1.82) I noticed lots more log corruption - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE We have deployed 2.0.5 as well using the manual. We have had it running for well over a week now and have not seen any issues at all. Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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. -- -- Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Andy/Scott, We are running 2.0.5 and I am not sure if that has anything to do with it. I have always had corruption with the previous versions when the server got to busy. I just have not seen that with 2.0.5 yet. Darrell Andy Schmidt writes: Hi, Oh, so it's NOT just me. Yes, there we virtually no corruptions before my upgrade from 1.82 to 2.04 - now they are plentiful. Best Regards Andy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Fisher Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:37 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE How have your logs been Darrell? When I was running it (I've since gone back to 1.82) I noticed lots more log corruption - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE We have deployed 2.0.5 as well using the manual. We have had it running for well over a week now and have not seen any issues at all. Darrell Goran Jovanovic writes: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? With everyone saying there are problems I am starting to get paranoid as I am not seeing any problems. Now of course that I have written this I am sure something is going to break really soon :( Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 11:07 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 02:54 PM 3/1/2005 +0100, Erik wrote: After many emails to Declude about this, they confirmed to me this IS a problem and one of not a high priority to fix. We've reverted back to 1.82 until it's fixed. We have as well. I just tried 2.05 yesterday and spent 1 1/2 hours fixing stuff this morning. Clearly the upgrade is still not working very well. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot using Declude Anti-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. --- [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. -- -- Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
Uh, so the WEIGHT text is the problem? I have noticed from day one, that suddenly really obvious Spam that had failed countless tests and should have been deleted (with REALLY high weights) was actually being delivered. I had mentioned it on the list twice right after I was finally able to upgrade to 2.04 (after the crashes were fixed). I thought I was dreaming and have not yet found the time to debug it. Thanks for the pointer. If letting through high-weight Spam is low priority on the to be fixed list, then I guess I just have different priorities G? Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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 Fritz Squib Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 08:42 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE Apparently I missing something bloody obvious, but with 2.0 running it seems like my delete action doesn't work as expected any more. Running the latest 2.x release downloaded last night. --Global Config-- WEIGHT20weight x x 20 0 WEIGHT30weight x x 32 0 --Default.junkmail-- WEIGHT20HOLD WEIGHT30DELETE In a brief conversation with Declude the response I got was: The problem is probably the change in the way the DELETE action works. In the past, it would delete the E-mail for all recipients. Now, it only deletes the E-mail for recipients that use the DELETE action. It still seems like the HOLD action is taking precedence over the DELETE action since mail with weight over my WEIGHT30 test winds up in the hold folder even though the log file says: 02/01/2005 12:25:06 Qbb6c48770128853b Msg failed WEIGHT30 (Weight of 44 reaches or exceeds the limit of 32.). Action=DELETE. I has sent Scott debug log files but I still haven't figure out what I'm missing. Yes there are a *few* per user .junkmail files, with an action of WARN, but most of the held mail is either not for them (nor are they CC'd or BCC'd as far as I can tell) and/or (may or may not be related) in the spam review application there is no To: field reported. I have also tried changing 'weight' to 'weightrange' with the appropriate scores, and still see the same results Anyone else ? Fritz --- [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] Log Corruption
Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were clean, but considering it only happens a few times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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] Declude 2 and DELETE
If you are moving form IMail to smartermail your declude files will transfer over with out and issue, you may need to change path settings in your config files. I have dont this on one live domain that I am testing declude and smartermail with. Only problem at this point is the declude registration which is not affecting spam processing. As for the auto install it will not update or modify any of your config files and that is as it should be. It would be scarry if it tried to especially with the flexibility of declude. Kevin Bilbee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ncl Admin Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:47 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2 and DELETE At 11:20 AM 3/1/2005 -0500, Goran Jovanovic wrote: I put in the 2.0.5 upgrade on the weekend and so far have no seen any problems. I did the manual install and copied the declude.exe over, did the -diags and then started the SMTP service. I have looked in the logs but see nothing unusual. What type of problems did you spend time fixing? Instead of deleting bad messages which exceed my weight it captured them. Then I have to hand process all of them. It also got a zillion of them going to my catchall account which are normally not there so it was double the trouble so to speak. I have to hand process everything between my weight range of hold and delete to make sure that false positives are not just deleted. I also then block spam ip's while I do it which really cuts down on the next batch. I did send a low priority ticket to declude, as far as I am concerned I did the auto install and if it needed to fix things from weight to weightrange it should have done it. I haven't really currently got the time to re-do my settings. But might take a look at it in the near future but I am moving from Imail to Smartermail so not sure I should allocate the time. Jay [This E-mail scanned for viruses by F-Prot] --- [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] which DNS server?
I just want to dbl check that declude uses the NS server specified in the network interface properties box, and not the one in the iMail SMTP panel, yes? Can I explicitly set a NS sever for declude in the config? Robert --- [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] Declude 2.0 Issues
No issue reported to us regarding Declude software will ever be considered trivial or unimportant. It is essential that all issues be reported to Declude Support. A number of comments made recently on these lists refer to issues never reported to Declude. It should also be understood that the Declude forums are very informative for finding out from others whether they have experienced similar issues with the software. They are not, however, intended to be a mechanism for reporting problems to us. We have been monitoring the list messages regarding the DELETE action when there is a COPYALL account and we are concerned as to perceptions that there is a problem or issue with the software. There is a difference of opinion on how a COPYALL account should actually function: (a) to receive a copy of every message processed by the mail server, whether legitimate or not; (b) to receive a copy of only those messages for which there is at least one valid delivery. Aside from differing opinions on how the COPYALL account should function, our tests show that individual recipients whose per-user configurations specified DELETE were in fact being deleted from the recipient list and were not receiving the messages. At the same time, however, we discovered that there was information in the log file that would lead one to believe that the recipient was not being deleted. If the last recipient did not have DELETE as the action to take, the last action in the log file would not read DELETE, even if the previous recipient had been deleted. We are making the appropriate changes to the log file to ensure that all actions taken will be accurately recorded. In addition, we are implementing a configurable parameter to allow or disallow actions to apply to the COPYALL account. This release will be available after user testing and acceptance. It is important to know that we respond to each and every issue raised through our support system and also that when making a quote as to what 'Declude' may have said that the correct words are used within the appropriate context. --- [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] which DNS server?
From the manual:
6.4 DNS Server
By default, Declude JunkMail uses the same DNS server that {MAILSERVER}
uses. If you want to use a different DNS server, you need a line in the
configuration filestarting with DNS, followed by the IP of your DNS
server. For example, DNS 198.6.1.2.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Shubert
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:29 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] which DNS server?
I just want to dbl check that declude uses the NS server specified in
the network interface properties box, and not the one in the iMail SMTP
panel, yes?
Can I explicitly set a NS sever for declude in the config?
Robert
---
[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] Declude 2.0 Issues
Great response to the concerns, David. Much appreciated. Just to clarify: Other than the logging issue you referred to, are there any known issues with 2.05? If so, is there a list I can review to determine if we're ready to upgrade? Thanks, Darin. - Original Message - From: David Franco-Rocha [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:43 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2.0 Issues No issue reported to us regarding Declude software will ever be considered trivial or unimportant. It is essential that all issues be reported to Declude Support. A number of comments made recently on these lists refer to issues never reported to Declude. It should also be understood that the Declude forums are very informative for finding out from others whether they have experienced similar issues with the software. They are not, however, intended to be a mechanism for reporting problems to us. We have been monitoring the list messages regarding the DELETE action when there is a COPYALL account and we are concerned as to perceptions that there is a problem or issue with the software. There is a difference of opinion on how a COPYALL account should actually function: (a) to receive a copy of every message processed by the mail server, whether legitimate or not; (b) to receive a copy of only those messages for which there is at least one valid delivery. Aside from differing opinions on how the COPYALL account should function, our tests show that individual recipients whose per-user configurations specified DELETE were in fact being deleted from the recipient list and were not receiving the messages. At the same time, however, we discovered that there was information in the log file that would lead one to believe that the recipient was not being deleted. If the last recipient did not have DELETE as the action to take, the last action in the log file would not read DELETE, even if the previous recipient had been deleted. We are making the appropriate changes to the log file to ensure that all actions taken will be accurately recorded. In addition, we are implementing a configurable parameter to allow or disallow actions to apply to the COPYALL account. This release will be available after user testing and acceptance. It is important to know that we respond to each and every issue raised through our support system and also that when making a quote as to what 'Declude' may have said that the correct words are used within the appropriate context. --- [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] Declude 2.0 Issues
Since we did use the essential means of reporting this problem, we still got back: No. Declude Confirm hasn't been changed in a number of years, so it is not currently a high priority. -Scott And: As for Declude Confirm, I understand that it is a priority for you. The reasons why it isn't a very high priority right now are that [1] it is a free program, and taking time to modify it takes away from time making changes to products our customers are paying for, and [2] this is an issue that has been in the Declude Confirm code for many years without anyone reporting it. Unfortunately, there are just too many things that need to be done, and not enough time for everything. -Scott -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Franco-Rocha Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:43 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude 2.0 Issues No issue reported to us regarding Declude software will ever be considered trivial or unimportant. It is essential that all issues be reported to Declude Support. A number of comments made recently on these lists refer to issues never reported to Declude. It should also be understood that the Declude forums are very informative for finding out from others whether they have experienced similar issues with the software. They are not, however, intended to be a mechanism for reporting problems to us. We have been monitoring the list messages regarding the DELETE action when there is a COPYALL account and we are concerned as to perceptions that there is a problem or issue with the software. There is a difference of opinion on how a COPYALL account should actually function: (a) to receive a copy of every message processed by the mail server, whether legitimate or not; (b) to receive a copy of only those messages for which there is at least one valid delivery. Aside from differing opinions on how the COPYALL account should function, our tests show that individual recipients whose per-user configurations specified DELETE were in fact being deleted from the recipient list and were not receiving the messages. At the same time, however, we discovered that there was information in the log file that would lead one to believe that the recipient was not being deleted. If the last recipient did not have DELETE as the action to take, the last action in the log file would not read DELETE, even if the previous recipient had been deleted. We are making the appropriate changes to the log file to ensure that all actions taken will be accurately recorded. In addition, we are implementing a configurable parameter to allow or disallow actions to apply to the COPYALL account. This release will be available after user testing and acceptance. It is important to know that we respond to each and every issue raised through our support system and also that when making a quote as to what 'Declude' may have said that the correct words are used within the appropriate context. --- [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] Log Corruption
I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were clean, but considering it only happens a few times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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] Log Corruption
Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were clean, but considering it only happens a few times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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] Log Corruption
There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past. I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format. Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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. -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ =
[Declude.JunkMail] question on calculating weights
Hi All, Hope you don't mind another simple question... I have a spam message with a weight of 2: X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SNIFFER [2] The problem with this line was that we have sniffer weighted at 7. So I went to the Declude JM log and came up with this: 03/01/2005 13:17:46 Qdbca042102961063 Tests failed [weight=2]: IPNOTINMX=IGNORE SNIFFER=WARN CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE The problem here is that IPNOTINMX has a weight of -3 and CATCHALLMAILS has a weight of 0. So that would seem to imply that the total weight should have been 4 (7 - 3), instead of 2. Where did the extra -2 come from? Here are the relevant lines from the global.cfg file: IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -3 SNIFFER external nonzero d:\imail\sniffer\snfrv2r3.exe xnk05x5vmipeaof7 7 0 CATCHALLMAILS catchallmails x x 0 0 So somebody slap me on the side of my head and tell me what I'm missing. Thanks, Ben --- [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] timeout test on Spam
I use a variant of Matt's badcountrynorevdns test to punish timeout's from spam haven countries: BadCountryREVDNSTimeout.txt: REVDNS END NOTIS (Timeout) COUNTRY 50 IS CN COUNTRY 50 IS KR COUNTRY 40 IS RU - Original Message - From: Imail Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:18 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam Hi All, We get a fair amount of spam that slips through without triggering anything (including Sniffer). I notice in the headers for these messages a line like the following: X-Note: This E-mail was sent from (timeout) ([213.213.213.56]). Should I be using the timeout as a test for spam? If so, how? Thanks, Ben BC Web --- [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] Log Corruption
It's the same log format except that all the messages for a specific email are grouped together. Well most of the time they are grouped together. It does make eyeball parsing of the log easier. I load the logs into a database daily. With the 1.8x versions, I'll need to code around a new type of log corruption every one to two months. For the 3 days I was running 2.x, I had to code around 4 new corruption issues. Visually there is also more corruption. Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. - Original Message - From: Matt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:16 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past.I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format.MattGoran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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. -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] question on calculating weights
Could it be the NOLEGITCONTENT test? - Original Message - From: Imail Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:33 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] question on calculating weights Hi All, Hope you don't mind another simple question... I have a spam message with a weight of 2: X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SNIFFER [2] The problem with this line was that we have sniffer weighted at 7. So I went to the Declude JM log and came up with this: 03/01/2005 13:17:46 Qdbca042102961063 Tests failed [weight=2]: IPNOTINMX=IGNORE SNIFFER=WARN CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE The problem here is that IPNOTINMX has a weight of -3 and CATCHALLMAILS has a weight of 0. So that would seem to imply that the total weight should have been 4 (7 - 3), instead of 2. Where did the extra -2 come from? Here are the relevant lines from the global.cfg file: IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -3 SNIFFER external nonzero d:\imail\sniffer\snfrv2r3.exe xnk05x5vmipeaof7 7 0 CATCHALLMAILS catchallmails x x 0 0 So somebody slap me on the side of my head and tell me what I'm missing. Thanks, Ben --- [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] Log Corruption
Title: Message I haven't seen the new log format I'm not aware of any new log format. The FORMAT of the log files stayed the same (regular "version" specificchanges may apply) on the ORDER changes. Meaning: all log lines for aSINGLE messageare now appearing in one set of lines - instead of log lines for various different messages appearing in strict "time" order. Before it was a "time" log, now it's more of a "message" log - but the log lines stay the same. Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 04:16 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log CorruptionThere has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past.I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format.MattGoran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
Title: Message Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. Maybe because he is running as a "service", thus can serialize the log output?
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
Title: Message I guess this is somewhat rhetorical at this point, but why change the logs to single lines and not at the same time seek to normalize the format using the same standards that are used for Web logs or even a simple comma separated (quoted qualifier) database format? Matt Andy Schmidt wrote: I haven't seen the new log format I'm not aware of any new log format. The FORMAT of the log files stayed the same (regular "version" specificchanges may apply) on the ORDER changes. Meaning: all log lines for aSINGLE messageare now appearing in one set of lines - instead of log lines for various different messages appearing in strict "time" order. Before it was a "time" log, now it's more of a "message" log - but the log lines stay the same. Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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 Matt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 04:16 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past. I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format. Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
Title: Message Because it wasn't needed for Smartermail. - Original Message - From: Matt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:54 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I guess this is somewhat rhetorical at this point, but why change the logs to single lines and not at the same time seek to normalize the format using the same standards that are used for Web logs or even a simple comma separated (quoted qualifier) database format?MattAndy Schmidt wrote: I haven't seen the new log format I'm not aware of any new log format. The FORMAT of the log files stayed the same (regular "version" specificchanges may apply) on the ORDER changes. Meaning: all log lines for aSINGLE messageare now appearing in one set of lines - instead of log lines for various different messages appearing in strict "time" order. Before it was a "time" log, now it's more of a "message" log - but the log lines stay the same. Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 04:16 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log CorruptionThere has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past.I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format.MattGoran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam
That usually indicates your are having DNS issues. Are you sure your DNS server is healthy and responding to queries quickly? Darrell Imail Admin writes: Hi All, We get a fair amount of spam that slips through without triggering anything (including Sniffer). I notice in the headers for these messages a line like the following: X-Note: This E-mail was sent from (timeout) ([213.213.213.56]). Should I be using the timeout as a test for spam? If so, how? Thanks, Ben BC Web --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Log Corruption
There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past. The log format has not changed other than blocking specific messages together. The issue about the log corruption has existed in Declude for as long as I can remember. In regards to DLAnalyzer it makes every best effort to determine if the log file line that was corrupted is salvageable. However, if you look at the log files and you will see from time to time the corruption will look like this. 04/14/2004 23:59:59 Qb45c04ab008c9990 Msg failed SPAM04/14/2004 23:59:59 Where the start of a new line will show up the middle of a test name. Due to this type of corruption it is very difficult when the user is running in auto-detect test name modes to know if SPAM04/14/2004 is a valid test name or not. Techinically it could be.. The one thing to keep in mind if you would like to phase these types of corrupted tests out of your reports you can switch to the manual test mode where you define which tests are valid on your system. There is also an import option that you can use where DLAnalyzer will read your $default$.junkmail and import in your tests. Darrell Goran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were clean, but considering it only happens a few times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best Regards Andy Schmidt HM 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/ --- [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. -- = MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro. http://www.mailpure.com/software/ =
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
I though Pete had some locking mechanism built in to prevent overlapping. Pete? Darrell Andy Schmidt writes: Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. Maybe because he is running as a service, thus can serialize the log output? Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Log Corruption
Title: Message but why change the logs to single lines and not at the same time seek to normalize the format They were not changed to single lines? Single linesof ONE message were grouped together - rather than scattered about. They are still single lines - just the ORDER of their appearance in the log has changed. They are no longer sorted strictly by "time" but rather by message. May be I misunderstand what you are looking at? Best RegardsAndy SchmidtHM Systems Software, Inc.600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business)Fax: +1 201 934-9206http://www.HM-Software.com/ -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 04:54 PMTo: Declude.JunkMail@declude.comSubject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log CorruptionI guess this is somewhat rhetorical at this point, but why change the logs to single lines and not at the same time seek to normalize the format using the same standards that are used for Web logs or even a simple comma separated (quoted qualifier) database format?Matt attachment: HMSoftSmall.jpg
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
I think Pete's still in the bunker with the shields on high. - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 4:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I though Pete had some locking mechanism built in to prevent overlapping. Pete? Darrell Andy Schmidt writes: Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. Maybe because he is running as a service, thus can serialize the log output? Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] timeout test on Spam
That's a good question about the DNS server. When I run the response test from dnsstuff.com, my DNS servers get graded as A or A-, which would seem to be OK. Also, the timeouts only seem to occur on spam. Ben - Original Message - From: Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:36 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam That usually indicates your are having DNS issues. Are you sure your DNS server is healthy and responding to queries quickly? Darrell Imail Admin writes: Hi All, We get a fair amount of spam that slips through without triggering anything (including Sniffer). I notice in the headers for these messages a line like the following: X-Note: This E-mail was sent from (timeout) ([213.213.213.56]). Should I be using the timeout as a test for spam? If so, how? Thanks, Ben BC Web --- [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. Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] timeout test on Spam
Thanks Scott. Question: I'm not familiar with the NOTIS command; is that from Version 2 of JM? Ben - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam I use a variant of Matt's badcountrynorevdns test to punish timeout's from spam haven countries: BadCountryREVDNSTimeout.txt: REVDNS END NOTIS (Timeout) COUNTRY 50 IS CN COUNTRY 50 IS KR COUNTRY 40 IS RU - Original Message - From: Imail Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:18 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam Hi All, We get a fair amount of spam that slips through without triggering anything (including Sniffer). I notice in the headers for these messages a line like the following: X-Note: This E-mail was sent from (timeout) ([213.213.213.56]). Should I be using the timeout as a test for spam? If so, how? Thanks, Ben BC Web --- [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] Log Corruption
(Pete isn't here much) I remember this thread from a long time back. Messsage Sniffer doesn't take any particular efforts to lock the log file to prevent collisions. And he agreed that Microsoft Windows had the nasty habit of not always serializing writeln statements to a text file. Scott wasn't inclined to add a spinlock feature so that the log lines could be cleaned up, on the bases that it was effort taken away from other priorities, that corruption tended to indicate a struggling server that ought to be upgraded, and general annoyance that calling an atomic function in the OS... didn't work. Andrew 8( -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:39 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I though Pete had some locking mechanism built in to prevent overlapping. Pete? Darrell Andy Schmidt writes: Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. Maybe because he is running as a service, thus can serialize the log output? Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] timeout test on Spam
NOTIS was introduced in 179i16 - Original Message - From: Imail Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 4:49 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam Thanks Scott. Question: I'm not familiar with the NOTIS command; is that from Version 2 of JM? Ben - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam I use a variant of Matt's badcountrynorevdns test to punish timeout's from spam haven countries: BadCountryREVDNSTimeout.txt: REVDNS END NOTIS (Timeout) COUNTRY 50 IS CN COUNTRY 50 IS KR COUNTRY 40 IS RU - Original Message - From: Imail Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:18 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] timeout test on Spam Hi All, We get a fair amount of spam that slips through without triggering anything (including Sniffer). I notice in the headers for these messages a line like the following: X-Note: This E-mail was sent from (timeout) ([213.213.213.56]). Should I be using the timeout as a test for spam? If so, how? Thanks, Ben BC Web --- [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[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, 5:38:54 PM, Darrell wrote: Dsic I though Pete had some locking mechanism built in to prevent overlapping. Dsic Pete? Yes. This is it. (quite a lot of locking actually) This is a pet peeve of mine so I'm going to go just slightly off topic - it might help someone else out there writing code like this... There are a number of things in Win32 land that are not atomic like they should be. (Atomic meaning - they complete all at once before anything else can happen.) One of these that caused a lot of extra work in SNF peer-server code is rename(). The other is appended writes to a file. As a result, it is possible for more than one thread to believe it has renamed a single file successfully - which is supposed to be impossible. Thread A tries to rename file JOB.QUE to JOB.AAA and succeeds. Thread B tries to rename file JOB.QUE to JOB.BBB and succeeds!!! The actual file name at the end - flip a coin and pick one - JOB.BBB or JOB.AAA. Appended writes work the same way. Thread A opens a file for Append and writes Thread A stuff and only thread A stuff so there!\n Thread B opens the same file for Append and writes: Thread B, thread B, what a silly thread I B!\n Both writes succeed happily. Unfortunate sleep deprived programmer sure that he is going stark raving mad opens up the file and sees: Thread A stufead B, what a silly th\n I B! there... where ... is following on to some other unrelated log entry... (sigh) Luckily, it seems that creating a file is atomic, so there is a way out. This is what I use for some simple inter-process locking (that, by the way, is cross-platform [posix] compatible): open(LockName.c_str(),O_WRONLY|O_CREAT|O_EXCL); --- The actual code I use for locking is bigger than this of course. I'm attaching an excerpt from logger.cpp that takes care of it. Hope this helps, _M win32lock.cpp Description: Binary data
Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, 5:48:17 PM, Andrew wrote: CA (Pete isn't here much) :-( I do usually lurk though... I'll try to post more often... ;-) _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.
[Declude.JunkMail] Kodak EZ Share
I have Kodak EZ Share that allows you to take pictures with your digital camera and email them out...when I email them to myself from another computerI never get them unless I tell it to send as is..if I choose "Best for email" I wont get them. Other customers are telling me they are not getting pictures either... I am trying to figure out why..I have taken out all my Imail rules and all .zip files from the virus config...and by the way...it won't even send them to an account that I have whitelisted.. Does anyone know where I could look to find out why I am not getting them..they go to my yahoo.com account just fine..and I have tried to decipher the log files with no luck. Could it be the virus program is deleting them? I use FPROT.. I am sure there are more customers that are not getting pictures that I have not heard from yet.. Richard FarrisEthixs Online1.270.247. Office1.800.548.3877 Tech Support"Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet" - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption It's the same log format except that all the messages for a specific email are grouped together. Well most of the time they are grouped together. It does make eyeball parsing of the log easier. I load the logs into a database daily. With the 1.8x versions, I'll need to code around a new type of log corruption every one to two months. For the 3 days I was running 2.x, I had to code around 4 new corruption issues. Visually there is also more corruption. Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. - Original Message - From: Matt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:16 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past.I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format.MattGoran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were "clean", but considering it only happens a "few" times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really specific to 2.0x - but rather a secondary result because they forded me to deal with tremendously large log files (vs. the old MID log files). Best
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Kodak EZ Share
The first place I would check would be the imail log files. When you find the mail arriving make sure it does not exceed the max attachment size. Once you see it was wrote to the spool you can track it through Declude Virus/Junkmail. Darrell Richard Farris writes: I have Kodak EZ Share that allows you to take pictures with your digital camera and email them out...when I email them to myself from another computer I never get them unless I tell it to send as is..if I choose Best for email I wont get them. Other customers are telling me they are not getting pictures either... I am trying to figure out why..I have taken out all my Imail rules and all .zip files from the virus config...and by the way...it won't even send them to an account that I have whitelisted.. Does anyone know where I could look to find out why I am not getting them..they go to my yahoo.com account just fine..and I have tried to decipher the log files with no luck. Could it be the virus program is deleting them? I use FPROT.. I am sure there are more customers that are not getting pictures that I have not heard from yet.. Richard Farris Ethixs Online 1.270.247. Office 1.800.548.3877 Tech Support Crossroads to a Cleaner Internet - Original Message - From: Scott Fisher To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:36 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption It's the same log format except that all the messages for a specific email are grouped together. Well most of the time they are grouped together. It does make eyeball parsing of the log easier. I load the logs into a database daily. With the 1.8x versions, I'll need to code around a new type of log corruption every one to two months. For the 3 days I was running 2.x, I had to code around 4 new corruption issues. Visually there is also more corruption. Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. - Original Message - From: Matt To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 3:16 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption There has always been corruption of the logs. What seems to have changed here is that there is a new log format and the programmed exceptions in DLanalyzer are no longer able to handle the types of corruption as seamlessly as in the past. I haven't seen the new log format, but I would imagine that if they built it in a column format and kept it to a single line, similar to Web logging standards, it should be even easier to parse the data and correct for issues. If they didn't keep to consistent columns, then this could be just as big of an issue to parse as before and a lot of the exception rules would have to be rewritten for the new format. Matt Goran Jovanovic wrote: Yesterday's report on my declude logfile showed =...10.01% 02/28/2005..10.01% FF156FB0094D05A.10.01% I00510.01% QCEA370970074D08A...10.01% SET.10.01% SNIFFQCE053ABD0086D062..10.01% This is from Total Messages Processed: 12,316 And loglevel set to HIGH and the size of the file is 122 MB I am running 2.0.5 Goran Jovanovic The LAN Shoppe -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:33 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I had the opposite experience. Back at, oh, 1.7x I ran on LOGLEVEL HIGH, and had lots of log corruption. I had to drop down to MID. The increase in spam volume made it such that at MID, I had lots of log corruption again. With 2.x and the lines being written in a batch, I noticed an immediate drop in my disk usage and a huge drop in corrupted lines. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:22 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption Hi, Yesterday was actually a good day (here a snippet): TEST # FAILED Percentage 18:51:5810.01% SNIF02/28/2005..10.01% SPA02/28/2005...10.01% WEIG02/28/2005..10.01% Sure, I used to get reports that were clean, but considering it only happens a few times a day, I don't consider it a major issue and I can live with it. Also I used to run in MID log level, but after 1.76 (or so), they removed the test summary line form MID level, and I needed to switch to HIGH log level. It's entirely possible that the log corruption is not really
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
I disagree with the struggling server logic. We saw the log corruption in a test environment a year ago that had minimal traffic, say a couple thousand messages a day. It was a dual 1.4GHz processor with 1 GB RAM and 10k RPM SCSI drives. Load was only about 1-5% during testing. Darin. - Original Message - From: Colbeck, Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 5:48 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption (Pete isn't here much) I remember this thread from a long time back. Messsage Sniffer doesn't take any particular efforts to lock the log file to prevent collisions. And he agreed that Microsoft Windows had the nasty habit of not always serializing writeln statements to a text file. Scott wasn't inclined to add a spinlock feature so that the log lines could be cleaned up, on the bases that it was effort taken away from other priorities, that corruption tended to indicate a struggling server that ought to be upgraded, and general annoyance that calling an atomic function in the OS... didn't work. Andrew 8( -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 2:39 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption I though Pete had some locking mechanism built in to prevent overlapping. Pete? Darrell Andy Schmidt writes: Odd things is that I never get log corruption in message sniffer. So somebody is writing out logs that don't get corrupt. Maybe because he is running as a service, thus can serialize the log output? Check out http://www.invariantsystems.com for utilities for Declude And Imail. IMail/Declude Overflow Queue Monitoring, SURBL/URI integration, MRTG Integration, and Log Parsers. --- [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] Log Corruption
On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, 7:14:31 PM, Darin wrote: DC I disagree with the struggling server logic. We saw the log corruption in a DC test environment a year ago that had minimal traffic, say a couple thousand DC messages a day. It was a dual 1.4GHz processor with 1 GB RAM and 10k RPM DC SCSI drives. Load was only about 1-5% during testing. Heavier loads will cause more processes to collide and so log corruption is likely to be more pronounced in those situations. _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: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption
Correct. What I was saying I disagreed with was the concept that it only occurred on struggling servers. This test machine was very lightly loaded and we saw log corruption. Darin. - Original Message - From: Pete McNeil [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Darin Cox Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 7:30 PM Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Log Corruption On Tuesday, March 1, 2005, 7:14:31 PM, Darin wrote: DC I disagree with the struggling server logic. We saw the log corruption in a DC test environment a year ago that had minimal traffic, say a couple thousand DC messages a day. It was a dual 1.4GHz processor with 1 GB RAM and 10k RPM DC SCSI drives. Load was only about 1-5% during testing. Heavier loads will cause more processes to collide and so log corruption is likely to be more pronounced in those situations. _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.
