Travis -
You are not slow - this is some what confusing until you get the hang of it.
Are you all set? Do you understand now how it works?
-Nick
Travis Sullivan wrote:
I think I got it... I am slow, I know :)
global.cfg contents:
COMBO filter C:\IMail\Declude\lists\combo.txt x 0 0
combo
Hi Travis -
I think most folks use combo's - the idea is to further punish an email
that fails more than one reliable test [like sniffer and xbl or ???.].
This is where Declude really shines - being able to punish emails
further based on previous test results. - you do not have to score
ea
Andy -
Very kool with the script! Thanks for sharing. I can sure use it -
-Nick
Andy Schmidt wrote:
I have done this in two ways.
You can export the registry and then use an editor that can handle line
breaks and other control characters (such as MS Words) to massage the
text
Here ya go Andy:
http://www.declude.com/tools/header.php
-Nick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Can someone point me to detailed info on what the BADHEADERS test looks
at and/or how this error can be remedied? Already looked in the declude
manual, not enough info.
Thanks, Andrew
ISP guy
---
Matt wrote:
Are you sure about that?
As sure as I can be -
Since midnight we have received 1,233 of them. Yesterday was even worse.
Today we have received 276.
-Nick
Matt
Nick Hayer wrote:
good link. I saw the apache errors as well - but only 168 total.
-Nick
Matt wrote:
Do
good link. I saw the apache errors as well - but only 168 total.
-Nick
Matt wrote:
Do you think it is possible that this is connected to the rash of
broken spamware that started yesterday (Apache error message from spam
zombies)? I have gotten probably 5,000 of those in the last 24 hours.
A
Thanks John!
-Nick
John T (Lists) wrote:
A clarification on how to "reset" Hijack:
For Declude versions 2.x and below, you need to end the Deccon.exe process.
It is also best to do this with Imail SMTP and Queue Manager service stopped
and no Declude.exe processes running to ensure that no pr
Thanks !
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
Stop/restart the decludeproc service
David B
www.declude.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 12:53 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re
Dave,
You need to stop/start deccon.exe That wil reset the counter so to speak.
Question to Declude support -
How does this work with Declude 3x?
Thanks!
-Nick
Dave Doherty wrote:
Hi all,
Running Declude version 1.82 with Hijack...
One of my customers go caught by Hijack a couple of d
You are always on top of this stuff Matt!
-Nick
Matt wrote:
This is spam from Scott Ricter, Spamhaus's #1 listed spammer. This
particular block is 65.175.2.0/24. Surprisingly it isn't widely
listed, but I did find it in MAILPOLICE, and if you have URIBL
support, it is also in SURBL presentl
Hi -
Well this is what I do on these -
Right off I put the ip space in my ipfile_suspicious_networks
65.175.2.0/24 Viper Hosting
If I keep getting spam from then then they go to the ipfile_networks
which I score higher.
Same for an entry into ipfile_suspicious_hosts
I then I would accumu
John, [or others ]
I use SpamReview to review held email. How does this fit now into the
mix with 3x Declude? I presume SpamReview will dump the 'return to
queue' files back into the /spool dir. Is this ok?
-Nick
John T (Lists) wrote:
I understand that in Declude 2.x and lower Dec
David,
I just want you to know I really appreciate your participation in this
list. I find it very helpful and reassuring!
Thanks!!
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
We have received the ticket and are currently looking into the issues
regarding MAILFROM and COUNTRY
David B
www.declude.com
___
Well this is more of a question than a stab -
Can we see the full header? Yesterday I had something very similar -
email from Venezuela but the ip was registered in Virginian according
to Arin.
-Nick
Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Anyone want to take a stab at this one I would appreci
Thank you David - will let you know if I see any issues!
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
2 new Directives
WAITFORTHREADS 1500
Located in the Declude.cfg - Defined in milliseconds eg. 1500 = 1.5 seconds
this can be changed so that when the maximum threads are in use this time
specifics the wait
Hi Sandy,
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
So what you're asking
for is a switch like -e, but which is more conditional, allowing the
possible result codes:
- 0, if -lt not met
- , if -lt met and <= -et value
- -et value, if > -et value
Exactly.
Sounds like a good option, a
Keith,
Keith Johnson wrote:
Travis,
In your setup, your Declude is running on a Windows 2k/2003 box calling your SA server on a Linux box on the same local network? I guess the speeds are much the same as quering a local DNS server for lookups. Sounds great, I will have look into thi
Hi Keith,
Keith Johnson wrote:
Nick,
If you don't mind, is SA heavy on the CPU? What kinda load are
you running with SA?
First I am no authority here but am willing to share my experience.
Sandy's spamd32 seems to be no issue as near as I can tell. The cpu
issue is with spamd. .I have
Anyway, the next version of SPAMC32 is coming out very soon with the
ability to consult a local SPAMC32 log file (rather than the main
SPAMD log file) to check which individual SA rules failed for each
message; this is a definite need.
Hi Sandy,
Well since you are working on the co
Travis Sullivan wrote:
So, the only thing I will see in the headers is the total score SA
results:
X-RBL-Warning: SPAMASSASSIN: Message failed SPAMASSASSIN: 3.
And declude scores only for the test group, like other tests in the
global.cfg file?
Correct. Very slick huh? And good job gettin
Travis Sullivan wrote:
SPAMASSASSINexternalnonzero "c:\imail\declude\spamc32.exe
-cw %WEIGHT% -sw 10 -f" 0
-f is supposed to be the filename... but the example doesn't give
one. So, how does spamc send a file name to spamd?
Declude hands it off to it. Actually I believe the e
t you will have to change.
what are these flags?
spamc32.exe -D -d 12.152.254.3 -a 16000 -lt 4 ht 100 -f
If you download Sandy's spamc32.exe it includes docs and samples. He can
explain it better than I. [I forgot.. sorry!. ]
-Nick
- Original Message ----- From: "Nick Haye
Hi Travis -
Sandy's plugin does the 'somehow' part. Simply have it point to your spamd.
Here is the line from my global.cfg that may help -
EXTERNAL.SPAMASSASSIN_v3.04externalNONZERO
"e:\imail\declude\spamd\spamc32.exe -D -d 12.152.254.3 -a 16000 -lt 4 ht
100 -f" 6
Erik wrote:
If Declude could confirm the order of how/which tests are run, it would be
nice to know.
I agree.
The archives may help but as I recall Scott [former of Declude] was
nebulous in what the order is. The only thing for sure was filters ran
last in the order listed in global.cfg
ine like
COUNTRIES0CONTAINS*A
Is that asterisk a literal or will it act as a wildcard? Is anyone
using this in a country filter?
---- Original Message
From: Nick Hayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 12:36 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.c
Help from the guru's please...
Wouldn't [shouldn't] this email fail the ROUTING test?
X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES->[IANA Reserved]->UNITED STATES->destination
X-Note: SMTP Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Note: Sent from: [Revdns: [No Reverse DNS]] [RemoteHostDomain:
lgvsoft.at] [RemoteIP: 58.142
Hi Matt -
Matt wrote:
Nick,
I think that it is worth while to point out that your stats are likely
skewed by dictionary attacks and backscatter. The overwhelming
predominance of SURBL and Sniffer-Pharmacy hits (named slightly
differently on your system), along with the massive number
Hi Tim,
Timothy Bohen wrote:
Thats pretty cool, so which ones should I be running in my global.cfg?
Your mileage will vary!
Here are the stats from my site for yesterday:
http://mdlp.madriveraccess.com/
I would suggest score low - check results often - and tune to fit your
needs.
-Ni
Hi Kim,
Kim Premuda wrote:
I experienced the maxed out processor(s) - I only tried it for a few min
and then went back to 2.0.16. Haven't tried it since!
-Nick
Nick,
The beta version 3.0.3 does not automatically create the 'work' folder below the 'proc' folder (ie. 'proc\
Hi Kim,
Kim Premuda wrote:
We installed the latest 3.0.3 beta tonight; the decludeproc service shot to 99% of CPU and stayed there for 15 minutes. During this time we accumulated over 1000 items in the proc folder; nothing was going out.
I experienced the maxed out processor(
Tyran Ormond wrote:
That still means that I have to setup includes for each of the
possible sending domains, still unacceptable and reason enough for me
to discard SPF completely.
Well be advised not all your mail will get delivered. I have some
insurance agencies whose mail will bounce if
Hi David -
I like the spfpass test - coupled with filters it does help aginst false
positives.
[I prepend all my tests with the test type - thanks Kami! - it makes
these filters easier to write -]
Here is my spfgood filter - I score it with a -12:
SKIPIFWEIGHT26
TESTSFAILEDENDNOT
ns as a service."
David B
www.declude.com
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 11:31 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] D3: Service stopped on its own, files
included.
Thanks -
-Nick
David B
www.declude.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 10:48 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] D3: Service stopped on its own, files
Dan,
Do you believe the slowness you are experiencing is for sure related to
this decludeproc.exe [will this work on any declude ver?] or maybe other
causes unrelated like dns issue or a traffic spike?
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.
I have posted decludeproc.exe 3.0.
David -
Would you kindly confirm exactly what version of Declude this 3.0 beta
is derived from? Is it 2.0.6.16 ?
Thanks
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.
I have posted decludeproc.exe 3.0.12 which should take care of the issue of
decludeproc stopping on its own.
Also
Morning Dave,
That would deny his internal
users the ability to resolve external domains.
Well you *may* have me on this one :) I do not know what dns server is
being used.
I use SimpleDNS so I can allow recursion by ip address/subnet. Bind
as well does this:
[ recurseallow ]
Hi Kevin,
Kevin Rogers wrote:
These tests (especially BADHEADERS) seem to be catching a lot of legit
mail lately. I've attached one of the headers It seems like many of
the emails are sent from Exchange servers. What exactly makes the
headers bad?Any ideas?
Here is what made this on
Hi Greg,
Are they
querrieng info's about domain names you're hosting or are this requests for
completely other domains and your server does the lookup and report the
result to the client.
The second case (other domains).
Turn off recursion. The ability to resolve non l
The LAN Shoppe
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Thursday, August
04, 2005
6:10 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re:
[Declude.JunkMail]
Spam box
Hi Andrew -
Colbeck, Andrew wrote:
Also,
I'
Hi Andrew -
Colbeck, Andrew wrote:
Also, I'd be a little
skeptical that ORF would do the job for Goran, as he is basically an
ISP for multiple organizations.
Common :) Don't be so negative..
He would need extracts from
their GALs for each organization, or whatever the
Thanx
Goran Jovanovic
The LAN Shoppe
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Thursday, August
04, 2005
1:43 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re:
[Declude.JunkMail]
Spam box
Richard Farris
Richard Farris wrote:
Is there a box I can put in front of
my Imail server that will help take some of the load off of the spam
filtering that Declude is doing
Hi Richard -
One method is to put ORF in front of your IMail box and via its
recipients blacklist feature refuse al
wow - it is so good to see the old r.scott back on the scene.
Are these posts a tease or will they be a regular thing? Hope you
haven't spent all of Barry's cash and are back to a daily grind though :)
-Nick
R. Scott Perry wrote:
> I’m not so sure it’s a DNS issue because the Imail spam f
Hi Will,
Sorry you are having problems - Declude is a good product - it may be
something simple here. I would say the most common thing is a dns issue
- stuff stacks up waiting for dns responses. Check that out first - send
more info too!
-Nick
Will wrote:
A number of years ago I purchas
Hello -
I am looking for some insight on these guys. I get quite a bit of what
is best described as suspicious email from their networks - are they a
legit or are they clever spammers?
Thanks!
-Nick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yesterday I complained about the lack of participation on this
you can include spaces such as:
BODY 10 CONTAINS " ABC"
*Please note is not syntax it is just there so you can see the space
I am talking about :)
David B
www.declude.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Nick Hayer
Sent: Tuesda
Hi David,
Are you aware of any bugs with the CONTAINS filter statement?
Thanks!
-Nick
David Barker wrote:
Kevin,
After reviewing your files you had sent me this is the problem you are
having:
1. The email you received was encoded in BASE64 (Msg failed BASE64)
2. In your global.cfg you ha
Declude support -
Would you comment on this? Is there a problem with 'CONTAINS' ? Would
you kindly share what other issues are being addresses in 'one they are
testing now' ?
Thanks!
-Nick
John Carter wrote:
I have reported to Declude a
problem with the "CONTAINS" statement. P
Hi Richard,
Richard Farris wrote:
I got hit again with these two
[69.60.97.208]
209.97.209.0/24
other than blacklisting the IP, how
do you stop it...
What I do is lookup the IP on senderbase. puts its ip addresses that
send mail in an ip_hosts.txt file and score that fil
On 14 Jul 2005 at 18:49, Matt wrote:
Why does this always happen to me...
karma
-Nick
I was looking to leave my IMail/Declude setup as my gateway spam
blocking component, and move hosted E-mail to a different server. All
I needed in the hosted mail server was something that c
Heimir Eidskrem wrote:
Hi Heimir
Not sure why this is not working.
Check your log file - if necessary run it on debug for a few emails -
this should give you your answer.
-Nick
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL P
Hi Chris
The only thing different about this site is that
it uses Windows authentication
to force a login.
Any ideas?
Does the site work with anonymous access enabled? Host header for
domain correct?
-Nick
Hi Dan,
Here are some thoughts -
I still don't know why Hijack decided to flag my gateway and hold its
messages (ALL messages in HOLD2 were verified to be destined for local
users).
Hijack cares about the senders - not the recipients I do believe
I still don't know why it only he
there are new
additions to my lists all the time, but it has paid off for me.
Matt
NIck Hayer wrote:
Does anyone have a list of newsletter [revdns?] senders that are
trusting to not send spam that they would be willing to share? I send
quite a bit of time trying to figure out if some emails
Does anyone have a list of newsletter [revdns?] senders that are
trusting to not send spam that they would be willing to share? I send
quite a bit of time trying to figure out if some emails are actuall
valid - for example stuff from roving.com, etc.
Thanks!
-Nick
---
This E-mail came from th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Barry -
A new incremental release (2.0.6.16) is now available for customers with a
current service agreement. This release includes:
. Virus scanner rules change option (EXITSCANONVIRUS)
Excellent! Scott will be mad! He liked all those scanners running for
8.1x has the patch out - I would suggest posting to the Imail list for
info on earlier versions?
Regards,
-Nick
Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
It looks like it will be 4 IMAP Vulnerabilties and 1 Web Calendering
vulnerability.
Darrell
---
inv
Bill Landry wrote:
Actually, some IMail spam tests run before being passed to Declude and
some after. The JunkMail archives will contain the gory details.
Bill
correct William - but the headers are after. I already tried to do this
awhile ago without success.. Key here is though - awhile
I do not think this will work. The imail headers are added after declude
sees the email
-Nick
Spaminator wrote:
Hi all,
I have a need to use Declude to filter mail to a user's spambox based on
X-IMAIL-SPAM in the headers (we're still using an imail filter that we don't
want to give up).
On 4 Mar 2005 at 12:51, Andy Schmidt wrote:
> Hi Nick, John, Eric, Fritz, Kevin, Dan, NCL Admin, et al:
> I recommendyou sit tight just a little longer.
Done!. I'm chilled. No problem. Really. Honest!
:)
The only thing that slightly ticked me off was lack of communication
about this bug. Now t
uch higher and I do not want to waste my time
> >> checking it. The problem is that the WEIGHT10 ROUTETO action
> >> removes me as a recipient and replaces me with [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> >> when the DELETE action is triggered, it tries to delete me as a
> >> recip
On 3 Mar 2005 at 16:18, David Franco-Rocha wrote:
> Prior to 2.0, the DELETE action had the highest priority and affected
> all recipients of a message. Even with per-user settings, if one user
> triggered the DELETE action, the email was deleted for everyone.
Oh.
I do not use ROUTETO anywhere so
On 3 Mar 2005 at 15:06, David Franco-Rocha wrote:
Hi David,
I am having problem with the DELETE action as well; have sent 2
support requests - would this issue be related to what you describe
below as well?
Thanks
-Nick Hayer
> We wish to let everyone know that through our own test
On 2 Mar 2005 at 18:07, Darin Cox wrote:
Hi Darin,
2.05 will pass email that should have been deleted. The total weight
may be 3 times your delete weight and the email will still be
delivered.
Declude tech support is aware of the problem - and as far as I know
it is unresolved.
I am back to
ain.
For now any requests to tech support cc'd to the list?
-Nick Hayer
>
> 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.
>
Hello -
I am seeing these tags in AOL bounces -
X-AOL-IP: 213.226.82.229
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:169167590:15837691
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0
Does anyone know what they represent? The first I believe is the
original sender ip; since these are coming to me mainly as a result
of joejobs I'm loo
On 9 Nov 2004 at 22:54, Bill Landry wrote:
> Nick, I cannot think of any RHSBLs that would be candidates for
> urirhssub, other than the SURBLs that currently use bitmasked
> responses.
I did not have any in mind but I was looking over the setups and this
scenerio came to mind..
Thanks for you e
On 9 Nov 2004 at 11:27, Bill Landry wrote:
Thanks!! Bill [I do have 3.0.1]
-Nick
> I should have clarified, the example I give below is for SA 3.0.1,
> since they changed the action from "header" to the more appropriate
> "body" setting between SA 3.0.0 & 3.0.1. So, you have it correct if
> y
On 1 Nov 2004 at 19:08, Sanford Whiteman wrote:
Sandy,
I have this working with SA 3.01 > very nice..!
Question - with your new 'e' switch - can the weight returned be
capped eg a max return value?
-Nick
> All,
>
> SPAMC32 has been updated to more easily function as a "weight" test in
> add
On 1 Nov 2004 at 19:08, Sanford Whiteman wrote:
Sandy,
Dunno what I did but in moving to SA 3x from 2.61 I cannot get spamd
to run. Any ideas? The error is
"can't execute /user/bin/spamd.."
THanks!
-Nick Hayer
> All,
>
> SPAMC32 has been updated to more easily functi
On 26 Oct 2004 at 10:43, Scott Fisher wrote:
Nice job!
Business as usual - back to spam busting..
-Nick
>
> I have created an external test that checks the subject for
> obfuscated subjects based on a filter file.
> It is available at: http://it.farmprogress.com/declude/declude.htm
>
> I have
lks will NOT -
I am for sure looking elsewhere -
-Nick Hayer
---
[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
For those that follow baseball...
the RedSox gave the Yankees an 'ATOMIC' WEDGIE' :)
-Nick
---
[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
Scott -
Is there a limit to how many tests that can be hidden? Do all the
tests that are listed have to be on a single line?
Thanks!
-Nick Hayer
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list
On 15 Oct 2004 at 12:49, Alejandro Valenzuela wrote:
Alex -
> I would like to have a test
> that checks if a message has been found on 3 or more black lists
>
> Then if that is the case, assign more points to it...
> Is this posible ??
Well I do not know how to count the number of failed tests
On 6 Oct 2004 at 18:52, Sanford Whiteman wrote:
> [ Don't worry, I'll cool off the cheerleading the moment a lot of
> SPAMC32 support posts come in. :) ]
Cheers and more cheers from me. Simply Excellent!
-Nick Hayer
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Dec
On 28 Sep 2004 at 16:58, R. Scott Perry wrote:
Scott -
> Thanks for pointing that out -- it should be fixed now.
Does this mean we need to do something on our end or retreive an
interim?
Thanks
-Nick
The format
> used for the forging virus lookups was changed, and we had to also
> make a ch
On 28 Sep 2004 at 16:15, R. Scott Perry wrote:
> That was added to v1.69, per http://www.declude.com/relnotes.htm .
Thanks. It may make a nice addition to the manual as well. :)
-Nick
>
>-Scott
> ---
> Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for
Scott -
wow.
Now when did that occur? I see no reference of this anywhere. Are
there any other switches?
Thanks
-Nick Hayer
> On 28 Sep 2004 at 14:37, Glenn \ WCNet wrote:
> The current version of HiJack supports 'whitelisting' by sending
> address in hijack.cfg.
>
On 28 Sep 2004 at 11:44, Richard Farris wrote:
Hi Richard,
You need to whitelist your ip, regretfully there is no way to config
by domain -
-Nick
> Now that I have HiJack, I found out yesterday when sending a mass
> email to all my customers that they were held...how do I take myself
> out of
On 28 Sep 2004 at 10:33, Jeff Maze wrote:
Hi Jeff,
> Hello,
> Just wanted to know if there's a place to download the latest .cfg
> files to handle the v1.8 additions. Or even an updated declude
> manual?
http://www.declude.com/Articles.asp?ID=116
-Nick
>
> Thanks..
>
>
> ---
> [This E-m
On 25 Aug 2004 at 15:18, E. Ballerini wrote:
Hi Erminio -
I saw this explanation on a google search - my question is are the
id's unique to this mac client eg ok to filter on?
Thanks
-Nick Hayer
> These are file attachments that have come from a Mac email client,
> probably Outl
Scott -
We are getting a lot of spam with this text in the email:
x-mac-type="4A504547"; x-mac-creator="4A565752"
Question - can I filter on this or is this a common MAC string?
Thanks
-Nick Hayer
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.dec
doesn't help review your hijack logs and
email Scott...
-Nick Hayer
> I have had a continuing problem with Hijack. I have several business
> customers with 25 plus work stations, these customers are getting
> caught in hijack on outgoing mails. I have added ALLOWIP entries for
>
On 17 Jun 2004 at 17:47, R. Scott Perry wrote:
Perfect. Thanks!
-Nick
>
> >Is it possible to get Hijack to run after DJMP? This would help me
> >to better manage my backup mailserver -
>
> The only way to do that would be if you are also running Declude
> Virus, you could use the "AVAFTERJM
Scott -
Is it possible to get Hijack to run after DJMP? This would help me
to better manage my backup mailserver -
Thanks
-Nick Hayer
---
[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
sting? I also
have DJMPro.
OT Question: SVList does not have a setting to work off a particular
IP. Is there a way to make an IP on a windows box 'primary' or
'default' in the sense programs such as SVList will *always* use it?
If so this would solve my problem
Thanks a
Welcome back Scott - how was your trip? Any details? Were you looking
for property in the islands now that you are flush with cash?
-Nick Hayer
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list
On 20 May 2004 at 13:34, John Tolmachoff (Lists) wrote:
> Incorrect. While it is true of the action, the weight will still be
> added.
Yup - I was thinking about 0 [zero] scoring and taking an action in
the applicable junkmail file.
Sorry about the misinformation..
-Nick Hayer
.
---
[
nfig files to not count the score?
nope.
Hope this confused ya...
Bottom line the way I see it - tests are executed in the global.cfg.
"IF" that test is defined in a particular .junkmail file that
junkmail file will define the action to take.
Cheers -
-Nick Hayer
>
> Thanx
>
My best guess is - Chuck & Berry - whoever now own Declude can't
fix it. Scott is on a cruise. No internet. No phone. When Scott
returns he will reboot the box - for now we just have to make do..
-Nick Hayer
On 20 May 2004 at 11:45, Matt Robertson wrote:
> >I have
r limits
-Nick
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Nick Hayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Darin Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 4:48 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail]
> Feature request: COMBO
have found a workaround for the multiple DUL issue
> by using custom filters
[In the archives you will find exactly this example provided by Matt]
This works well - a feature request for NOTCONTAINS has been made and
will improve the method
-Nick Hayer
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses b
On 19 May 2004 at 9:04, Richard Farris wrote:
Kinda - there is a test called
BYPASSWHITELIST
http://www.mail-
archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg17561.html
Hope this helps!
-Nick Hayer
>
> I have noticed that some of the spam getting thru is because a I have
> several in my whit
We purchased ours but now maybe its a freebe..]
-Nick Hayer
> Thanks,
>
> Ben
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "John Carter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:56 PM
> Subject: RE: [Declude.J
On 18 May 2004 at 12:45, Matt wrote:
Very slick Matt great idea!
-Nick Hayer
> One other thing. Unless you have a ton of traffic (~100,000/day) or
> have people doing BCC blasts from your server to hundreds of
> addresses, there is a setting in IMail 8.x that can slow
On 17 May 2004 at 23:23, Goran Jovanovic wrote:
> So right now if you use multiple scanners when you scan with ScannerA
> and it finds a virus Declude will still call ScannerB and have it scan
> as well?
Correct. Scott has said this is on his todo list..
-Nick Hayer
>
> Scott p
tate contract from Insight.
-Nick Hayer
>
> Thanks,
>
> Aaron Caviglia
>
> On May 17, 2004, at 8:23 PM, Goran Jovanovic wrote:
>
> >> For the latter there is an outstanding request to Scott to
> >> kill additional scanning once a scanner detects a virus..
&g
s come out with protection
for a new outbreak before another. The downside is cost and cpu
overhead. For the latter there is an outstanding request to Scott to
kill additional scanning once a scanner detects a virus..
-Nick Hayer
>
> I realize that the cost of F-Prot (which I am usi
201 - 300 of 364 matches
Mail list logo
