Re: [Declude.JunkMail] SpamDomains

I don't know how hard it would be, but what about just adding in a pre filter in the spamdomains test that will bypass the test. Like: Spamdomains.txt: [RDNS excluded from check] ebay.com greetingcardvendor.com [includes] .yahoo.com @msn.com etc, etc This would also allow us to build our

[Declude.JunkMail] Setting up local DNSBL

I have been thinking about setting up an in-house DNSBL and would appreciate it if some kind person here could point me in the right direction on getting started. I can pretty much figure out how to create a e-mail submission for the service when I want to make updates, but I'm not to sure on the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Opinions on web interface

Would you be interested in sharing this. It looks great! Thanks! Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Grotjan Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 4:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Opinions on web

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMCOP Account

Typically I only send SPAMCOP e-mails that pass through our Declude filters. The theory being that now SPAMCOP will know about that address, list it, and it won't clear Declude again. I don't see the reasoning behind sending SPAMCOP thousands of e-mails per day that are already stopped by your

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Happy days are here again...

So as of Monday are we going to have a new organization running the .com / .net TLDs? lol It's about time Buh Bye Verislime Jason - Original Message - From: Joshua Levitsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 2:12 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Happy

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OBFUSCATION filter

But, Kami just listed the revdns whitelists, wouldn't the spammer have to have a RDNS listing of something in her whitelist (not likely) to take advantage of the listing? Jason - Original Message - From: Keith Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 15,

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] autowhitelist wildcard?

So the e-mail that Mr. Koehler listed yesterday afternoon about this subject is incorrect? Darn, that would be an awesome feature. His e-mail is listed below... Personal Whitelist A personal whitelist allows you to accept email messages from any email address you want no matter how many Spam

[Declude.JunkMail] Death to Trustic Trustic Service Ending

Everyone, We have decided to close the Trustic service. As has become apparent recently, there are several issues with the system as it is designed. As such, we do not believe Trustic will reach the level of accuracy that we require. The issue of handling large ISPs that, for the most part,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Spamdomains com.

Title: Message I think that while the spamdomains test is wonderful, many people are trying to overuse it as a test. IMO it is there to protect against forgeries of the major e-mailservices, and it does that task great. It's usefullness declines when it is used in a greater fashion. For

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..

- Original Message - From: Matt Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 11:32 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL.. 2. To send Trustic your (confirmed!) spam (typically only that which has received very heavy weighting and

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..

All tiffs aside :), Can I get some clarity on the operation here? If I personally submit an e-mail that says 10.10.10.10 is a spammer IP, and that same address has 10 positives and 1 negative (Me). I understand that the IP will probably be trusted, but is there something in the background that

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] New spamcop style RBL..

Josh, What is the entry you have put in your config file? (If you don't mind sharing) Thanks Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joshua Levitsky Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2003 9:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu

Title: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude using 50% cpu Also, can we ask what hardware / OS this is running on? Jason - Original Message - From: John Tolmachoff (Lists) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:03 PM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail]

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] DNS Test?

Great letter Kevin, but I recently tried to explain this to a company and their engineer said that it was by design. His explanation was that they did it for security/obscurity reasons and we were applying to strong restrictions on mail delivery. Sometimes you just can't win with these

[Declude.JunkMail] Nolegit test

I would like to begin using the NOLEGITCONTENT test, but the mail archives are down :(. Can someone send me the lines I need in the configs to get this going? Thanks Jason

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Nolegit test

Thanks Scott (and Bill) We are holding on 20 right now (with very few FPs), so without divulging the details of the test, is -8 too much or too little a weight? Or should I just test test test to see what types of mail are failing/passing the test? Thanks Gents! Jason - Original Message

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] AOL

Isn't that backwards? Firewall with Fixup - ESMTP will not work, and mail defaults to ordinary SMTP transaction Firewall without Fixup -- ESMTP works fine Jason - Original Message - From: Rick Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] DSN:Tarpitting and declude firewall integration integration

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's not a tarpit. You have a dynamic IP blocker. Tarpitting doesn't block, it slows the attack down, consuming more of their resources, and making their connection seem like it is stuck in a pit of tar (hence the name) Jason - Original Message -

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude Processes Server Load

Kami, Is your DNS that IMAIL/Declude uses local to you? Or are you using an upstream DNS? That many IPV4 tests may warrant this. We noticed a large performance boost by using a DNS on the local LAN. Just a thought - Original Message - From: Kami Razvan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] updated spamdomains list

Rocketmail.com resolves to yahoo.com So: Rocketmail.com yahoo.com Would be a valid entry What about the following? Bigfoot.com Geocities.com Rocketmail.com Markus --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the