Does anyone have the proper setup in Declude to query
sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org and interpret the result?
I don't think I'm doing it correctly.
Thanks
-David
--
Best regards,
David mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.
Hello Darin,
Wednesday, November 15, 2006, 4:12:49 PM, you wrote:
DC SBL ip4rsbl.spamhaus.org * 55 0
DC XBL ip4rxbl.spamhaus.org * 55 0
I was using 127.0.0.2 for SBL and 127.0.0.4 for XBL but Spamhaus lists
.2-4 for SBL and .2-6 for XBL but I guess * would work
Hello Michael,
Thanks for the great research.
Wouldn't this be the purpose of
Vulnerability detection in Declude? Declude detects mal-formed
messages that can allow viruses to be hidden from email server virus
scanners.
We treat all vulnerabilities as viruses, send the notice and 86 the
MN You can now submit Phishes to http://www.phishtank.com . At least you can
MN do something about them now, but it remains to be seen how effective the
MN information will be.
I've read some stories on this one. Is Declude considering developing
support for this with their API?
--
Best
Anyone familiar with the difference between MXRate's public list and
their paid list/service (other than the option to load the list
locally)
--
Best regards,
David mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
Hello Matt,
M The list and the service are both based on the same data, but are for
M totally different purposes. The service is really something that is
M integrated with Alligate, and it is not used exactly like a blacklist
M would be since it is based on probabilities. The blacklist version
Has anyone been having a problem with Russian spam lately? Seems to be
targeted to Ukraine and come from .ru domains being relayed through
zombies in U.S.
--
Best regards,
David mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing
I'm looking at moving from Imail 7.13 to Smartermail but I do ALL
anti-virus/spam in Declude and don't want my users to have any spam
filter settings in Smartermail. Does anyone know if it's easy to disable those
features/remove them from the web interface?
--
Best regards,
David
Hello Kevin,
Thanks. How about any unintended consequences between the two if you
keep SM's filtering turned off?
Wednesday, August 2, 2006, 12:25:42 PM, you wrote:
KB It is pretty easy to hide the settings. I have placed DIV
KB tags around the items I do not want our users to see/use place a
Does anyone have any direct comparison of CPU usage from a real world
installation between Imail 8.15 and SM 3.x running
Declude/FProt/Sniffer/InvURIBL?
--
Best regards,
David mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
Hello Matt,
Thanks Matt, I'm running as a gateway so Webmail/POP/etc are
completely out of the picture. Just trying to squeeze all the proc
utilization I can out of this thing.
Thursday, March 30, 2006, 4:27:56 PM, you wrote:
M Since the Declude part of the setup accounts for more than 90% of
I'm trying to understand the difference between an external test and
the externalplus test.
The way I understand is that 'external' is used to return a weight (as
defined on the line that calls the test) if the test fails and/or if
it doesn't fail. Or, if the weights are left off, it can simply
Hello Matt,
Tuesday, February 7, 2006, 8:26:47 PM, you wrote:
M If you want to have them all delivered, and you used the HOLD action,
M you can drop both the Q and D files in the spool and it should pick them
M up.
That's what we do now to release spam except that we also call
smtp32.exe.
M If
FYI...From Sniffer list:
Drop the q/d files back into the \spool\proc directory. Declude will
reprocess them. If you put them in just the \spool, queue manager will send
them out in the next queue run, bypassing Declude.
John
Confirmed, that works to reprocess.
--
Best regards,
David
Does anyone know if the %ALLRECIPS% variable contains bcc and cc info?
I asked support and they told me The list of recipients is taken from the
message envelope, not from the
message headers. The list of all recipients shows all recipients listed
in the envelope; it is a comma-delimited list.
Hello Matt,
Friday, January 13, 2006, 6:43:05 PM, you wrote:
M I suppose that it makes sense to not set WAITFORMAIL to 0, though Harry
M posted this morning that his was set that way and working properly.
M Personally I would be curious to see what happens if you set it back to
M 0 and restarted
Hello Matt,
Friday, January 13, 2006, 12:29:25 PM, you wrote:
M I would throw both logs into Debug and restart just to see if
M there areany clues in there.
Did this and couldn't come up with anything out of ordinary.
M One other longshot that would be interesting would be to change
M
Hello Matt,
Friday, January 13, 2006, 2:04:00 PM, you wrote:
M Great news. Now Declude can look for a bug in how it handles
M certainlicense codes and maybe fix this for others. Maybe Markus
M could trythe same thing.
Ok, I'm not sure why the license code change worked at all. Been on
with
Hello Sharyn,
Tuesday, September 13, 2005, 1:32:42 PM, you wrote:
SS Suggestions?
A good while back someone here recommended www.ks-soft.com. GREAT
application.
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail
Dsic I had that exact same issue - my overflow would fill up even though the
box
Dsic did not appear to be taxed. Add the DNSOVERRIDE in the declude.cfg file
it
Dsic made a huge difference - fixed my issue.
In our experience any time overflow is filling fast but the machine's
processor is
SF The new Declude test
SF HELO-DYNAMIC dynhelo x x 50 0
Any issues with this test if Declude is behind a Postfix gateway with
HOP set to 1?
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
DB If possible you should use the IPBYPASS rather than the HOP
Any particular reason? ALL mail passes through the PF gateways first.
Imail/Declude can't be touched from any outside network. The only port
25 allowed into their LAN segment is from the segment that the PF
gateways are on.
--
Wednesday, July 13, 2005, 9:23:14 PM, you wrote:
ML Also I hope the issue of orphaned emails is being
ML addressed with Declude and SM.
I was going to ask, but can I take this thread to assume that
Declude/Smartermail is not quite ready for production in a higher
volume environment?
I'm
Wednesday, June 22, 2005, 11:04:22 AM, you wrote:
DS I've seen these errors for years, but never bothered to ask
DS Does this mean my DNS server had a failure, or just that the domain it
DS looked up does not have MX or A records?
DS 06/22/2005 00:39:15 Qeb72438900c4923f WARNING: DNS server
Hello Dan,
Friday, June 24, 2005, 9:50:10 AM, you wrote:
DH SERVFAIL means that the domain does exist and the root name servers have
DH information on this domain, but that the authoritative name servers are
DH not answering queries for this domain.
Great, thanks Dan. Now, Declude...are there
Hello David,
Friday, June 24, 2005, 12:16:23 PM, you wrote:
DFRD I will get back to you (and the list) on this by Monday. I have to scan
the
DFRD entire Declude source tree for these types of messages and will let you
DFRD know.
Thanks. That will be very helpful.
BTW - Another thanks to
I've seen these errors for years, but never bothered to ask
Does this mean my DNS server had a failure, or just that the domain it
looked up does not have MX or A records?
06/22/2005 00:39:15 Qeb72438900c4923f WARNING: DNS server 66.179.12.115
returned a SERVER FAILURE error for MX or A for
SF Flip your log into debug mode for a couple of emails. You'll see exactly
SF what order everything runs.
Great idea. I'll let you know what we find.
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To
I know this has been discussed at times before but am not sure of the
status since the more recent releases. I'm looking at running invURIBL
but I would like to run it AFTER Sniffer and ONLY if Sniffer didn't
return a hit. Is this possible?
Also, I have an external test that I want to use to
Hello Dan,
Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 10:57:13 AM, you wrote:
Don't know of an outside source, but I always explain it like a normal
envelope.
You can write ANY address you want as the return address and
drop it in a public mailbox. If it isn't delivered, it will be
returned to the address that was
Hello Darrell,
Tuesday, May 17, 2005, 10:56:46 AM, you wrote:
Dsic David,
Dsic There is no way native to Declude to prevent an external test from running
Dsic based on the results of another external test. The only thing I can think
Dsic of is set invURIBL's SKIPWEIGHT value to the weight that
Dsic understanding is that external tests are ran in the order they are listed
in
Dsic the global.cfg.
That would be very convenient. Can someone from Declude confirm this?
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
This E-mail came from the
Dsic I found an answer in the archives from Scott. External tests are ran in
the
Dsic order they are listed in the global.cfg.
Dsic http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg06191.html
Thanks. This does help. That thread is about 2.5 years old now, can
someone from Declude
I downloaded the SM/Declude demo, thinking of moving from Imail. One
thing I noticed is that for each message, SM appeared to move it's
version of the D/Q files from spool, to a processing folder and then
process it. This seems like twice the necessary disk activity over
just processing it from
Hello David,
Friday, April 29, 2005, 4:27:38 PM, you wrote:
DFRD msg to Declude and, after a set period of time, tries to deliver it.
Taking
DFRD it out of the spool prevents SmarterMail from grabbing the file until
DFRD Declude has finished with it.
So there is an inherent delay in the
Hello Sanford,
SW If it's just a file move to another location on the same volume, it
SW should hardly be noticeable. A copy would be another story.
That's what I thought. But when disk I/O is already a big issue, it's
hard to add anything more.
--
Best regards,
David
Hello David,
Friday, April 29, 2005, 4:55:53 PM, you wrote:
DFRD No, there is not an inherent delay in the delivery of all messages. If
DFRD Declude does not complete processing within a specified time period,
DFRD SmarterMail tries to take the file. However, if Declude finishes
processing
So,
Old thread here, but I'm just catching up. Your budget requirements
are going to make a comprehensive solution pretty difficult. Like some
other posters mentioned, I think your best bet would be good
monitoring. Someone recommend ks-soft (www.ks-soft.com) to us. We've
been using for about 9 months
We're running JM+Sniffer and still having some problems with phishes.
Here's the headers of a message that passed through and didn't trip a
single test. Our user got 140 of these in a period of a few hours. He
always seems to be on the front end of these things.
I'm running spf so it didn't fail
Hello Scott,
Wednesday, February 16, 2005, 2:52:43 PM, you wrote:
SF 1. Prescan off in Declude Virus and use clamav as a scanner. This caught 656
SF in January. It's a beast on your CPU utilization as almost every mail will
SF need to be virus scanned.
I already run PRESCAN OFF but I'm only
Hello Matt,
Wednesday, February 2, 2005, 2:16:46 PM, you wrote:
M So does anyone here have any experience with Web Edition and the
M limitations, and have an opinion about whether or not this would work
M with an IMail/Declude setup (or for that matter another E-mail platform
M since IMail will
Declude Queue is nice and was invaluable before the Queue
Manager service on Imail.
The only problem is this:
RSP than X. At that point, when an E-mail arrives, Declude will start enough
RSP Declude processes to hit the limit of X (each of which scans a single
E-mail).
DQ requires a continues
Hello Darrell,
Monday, January 24, 2005, 5:38:51 PM, you wrote:
Dsic We do the same thing. One thing you can do is fake mail coming in. I
use a
Dsic batch file.
Dsic REM THIS WILL CLEAN OUT THE DECLUDE QUEUE
Thanks we'll give it a shot. This should be a great help.
--
Best regards,
FINALLY!
AV ADD ALLOWVULNERABILITIESFROM option that instructs Declude Virus to allow
vulnerabilities from a specific E-mail address or domain.
JM ADD Changes HOLD action so that users can specify the directory to hold spam
in.
These two took a while but it's great to see them finally in the
DS I hate to disagree with you! See below email. I am also working on
DS finding in my archive another email between Scott and self clarifying
DS Service Agreements this same topic.
You're correct, the SA did used to cover all products. I believe the
actual wording on their site indicated that
Something's up with Declude. About 9 this morning I started getting
thses in my Declude log files but not persistent. I've got good sniffer
log files before, during and after this.
11/22/2004 14:15:31 Q3acf00d70024690f Error 2 starting external program
[P:\Progra~1\Snifferlicenseidhere.exe
Hello R.,
Monday, November 22, 2004, 3:53:49 PM, you wrote:
Something's up with Declude. About 9 this morning I started getting
thses in my Declude log files but not persistent. I've got good sniffer
log files before, during and after this.
11/22/2004 14:15:31 Q3acf00d70024690f Error 2
MG Unfortunately there is no justdoit.exe for this. Maybe when God will give me
MG some additional hors per day ;-)
I keep asking Him for this, but so far.
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
I've got a pretty simple need, but having trouble figuring out how to
accomplish this. I have one domain that wants to put a specific text
string in the subject line of all messages coming from a list of
sender domains. In other words if a message is coming to example.com
from domain1.com,
M That's life as they say. You can set up the filter to be very efficient
M by placing a line at the top of the filter to prequalify it and save
M processing.
M ALLRECIPS END NOTCONTAINS @cutomerdomain.com
Then the rest of my lines would look like this:
MAILFROM 0 CONTAINS
Hello Sanford,
Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 2:05:17 AM, you wrote:
I think you're missing the whole point here. I never claimed (at least
I don't think I did) that XML was a better/faster way of storing large
amounts of relational data with high I/O demands.
Of course there are better methods of
Hello Markus,
Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 10:31:27 AM, you wrote:
MG I've to set up Imail/Declude on a Dell Poweredge 1750 with Dual 3 GHz Xeon
MG CPUs and 4 Ethernet Ports.
MG 2 x Intel NICs
MG 2 x Broadcom NetXtreme Gbit NICs
MG Now I have two questions:
MG 1.) Anyone has had the known
Hello Markus,
Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 11:20:16 AM, you wrote:
MG And your solution? Installing another NIC card (3Com) beside the other four
MG existing ethernet ports?
Yea, that's what we reluctantly did. This is our most annoying Imail
issue. We restart SMTP and Queue service as well.
Hello Charles,
Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 11:42:56 AM, you wrote:
CF Just as a note, you can use Kiwi Syslog as your syslog server (it's free if
CF you don't want to use the more advanced features), then write the log
CF files from Kiwi to anywhere on the system you want, you can even run
CF it
Hello sbsi,
Tuesday, November 9, 2004, 5:00:39 PM, you wrote:
sl How do you handle larger mail boxes/webmail/imap if you are
sl keeping your /imail/ main directory/program files down to a lower
sl disk space?
sl I understand keeping the disk space down to a minimum but
Any word on whether Declude has decided to support Smartermail? I'm
running Imail 7.13 and 8.10. No rush to switch except for reliability.
I'm tired of Imail NIC problems and the POP service always locking up.
So far I've been extremely happy with Smartertools products.
--
Best regards,
David
Hello Eric,
Monday, November 8, 2004, 9:30:42 AM, you wrote:
EK What about SQL support in another product? I'd look at
EK switching but the db storage is key to me. I rebuilt a machine
EK after a crash and had imail back running with 100+ domains and
EK 2000 users quickly with all the account
We're moving our installs to SM as well, hoping to see Declude support
for it ):
J Ditto! One more vote for SM.
Looks like we're going that route as well with our 2 (soon to be 3)
installations.
Really hope to be able to take Declude with us. If not, will probably migrate
to MXGuard.
DS We are probably leaning this way too but still unsure because of sign-up
DS applications we run require we store email account user info into SQL.
Yep, email address and associated date link to other customer data for
us too. The way to handle it is through syncing dbase data with data in
the
Hello Sanford,
Monday, November 8, 2004, 4:36:07 PM, you wrote:
They are so far ahead of Imail by using. . . XML instead of. . .
registry it's not funny.
SW Hrm. An XML file vs. a memory-mapped, intelligently cached, indexed
SW b-tree.
The biggest problem with the registry is that it
Hello Matt,
M What number would turning off individual vulnerabilities in Declude
M Virus get on your list?
M :)
or per domain control of this feature? #1 Biggest problem is
vulnerabilities caught from TigerDirect receipts and United Airlines
confirmations.
--
Best regards,
David
Did you guys know Declude phone's home now:
undeliverable to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Original message follows.
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 18:48:12 -0400
Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: @***.com
Reply-To: @***.com
To: [EMAIL
Hello Erik,
Monday, October 4, 2004, 8:43:40 AM, you wrote:
E The software used to do this in prior versions as well.
I never knew that it did it. I'm not sure why this one bounced back to
me. I've been running Declude for years and never seen this before.
E asked me to look into other spam
Hello Markus,
MG Well, announcing such a feature would minimize the desired success:
MG Identify who's runnning multiple copies of imail with the same hostname and
MG only one declude license.
Is that the desire, or is the desire to have every unique hostname
separately licensed? It's kind of
Hello R.,
Monday, October 4, 2004, 9:04:57 AM, you wrote:
RSP FWIW, the installation instructions do mention this briefly.
Can you point me to this somewhere. I've read the 1.81 Installation
readme.txt and the following sections of the manual that both came
with the 1.81 files:
1.
RSP time IMail bounces an E-mail, if you want to find out why, you have to
RSP check the IMail SMTP log file. Our free BounceFinder utility can assist
RSP with that.
That's the thing. I searched Imail SMTP log and can't find
[EMAIL PROTECTED] anywhere in the log. I search Declude but it shows
Hello Markus,
Saturday, September 18, 2004, 1:49:12 AM, you wrote:
MG As I know you can specify a list of (max 100 ?) IPBYPASS entries. Only
MG IP-Adresesses, no CIDR-Ranges.
MG You can also set HOPHIGH to 1 or 2 so that not only the connecting IP but
MG also the previuos 1 or 2 will be compared
Monday, September 20, 2004, 3:08:56 PM, you wrote:
RSP That is correct -- WHITELISTIP will only check the IP address of the remote
RSP computer (in your case, the one that connected to the IMGate server). If
RSP you scan subsequent hops, and the IP appears later, it will not be whitelisted.
Ok, I realize this is a waay old thread, but I got behind and was
doing some archive research.
You can relax this weekend. :)
The latest interim 1.78i30 at http://www.declude.com/interim adds a
COPYFILE action (in the format TESTNAME COPYFILE C:\IMail\spool\copy\)
that will copy the file to
Hello Matt,
Friday, September 17, 2004, 4:38:36 PM, you wrote:
M David,
M COPYFILE is not a final action like HOLD is, but it works almost
M exactly the same way in how it handles the files. The difference in
M how the files are handled come down to the Declude headers. HOLD
M actions will
Hello Markus,
Friday, September 17, 2004, 7:01:14 PM, you wrote:
MG A.) MOVE certain messages to configurable folders
MG B.) COPY certain messages to configurable folders
MG 1.) If you're an ISP Admin: Do you know what's happening near below your
MG 2.) Do you maintain a personal filter file
Hello Kevin,
KB I do not think you have done much performace testing of XML in e loaded
KB server environment.
Actually, Pete is the guy on this list that probably has the MOST
experience with loading and parsing files. Our 4MB sniffer rule
base loads and parses a message in less than 250ms .
PM Consider also that it is likely an XML based configuration would
PM reduce the number of files required for a given system. - searching
PM for files takes time too.
Exactly, the file/folder structure of per user/domain actions makes
Declude incapable of handling custom actions for 1000's of
Ok, couldn't resist my $.02
M sense, but I think they are putting the cart before the horse. Wouldn't
M it be much better to work on creating a new format for the config files
DREAMING
Like an XML based config file that incorporated Junkmail, Virus and
Hijack configurations as well as per user
M Why a 5 MB download for an IP4R test?
Yea, I don't get this. Does this harvest virus IPs from our system and
report them back to Declude?
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
Just to add my $.02, I think I have to agree with Matt on 100% of his
message.
Especially...
M I hope that Barry and Charles both understand that Declude is not an
M inexpensive product and I'm sure that everyone around here expects a
Almost $2500 for add-ons is more than the base product.
Hello Chuck,
Wednesday, March 10, 2004, 12:35:02 PM, you wrote:
CS I'm trying to collect data for a SPAM (pass and fail report), also I intend
CS to whitelist with exturnalplus from our database
This goes to some of my questions the other day. We're looking at the
doing the same thing with an
I'm working on a white list solution to allow per user white listing
based on the sender/sending domain. My setup is primarily as Store
and Forward for another server. I have about 500 domains with about
20,000 users doing 300k msgs per day.
Redirecting looks like a nice option but I'm a bit
Hello David,
Tuesday, March 9, 2004, 1:06:42 PM, you wrote:
KDa. Using %ALLRECIPS% can cause problems when there is a larger
KD number of recipients. Some of the parameters may not be passed
KD or may be are stripped off due to limitations of the length of a
KD command
I want to use Sniffer to whitelist messages that would fail other
Declude tests, not just Sniffer alone AND I want to retain the
original Sniffer failure code if the message did fail Sniffer.
Sohere's where I'm headed.
Keep my single Sniffer weighted test for spam detection and add this
Hello David,
Friday, December 5, 2003, 11:44:41 AM, you wrote:
DS 3. Anyone see any problems with this scenario?
Ok, I'll answer my own question. In thinking about this more, this
isn't going to work.
If I recode my rule base to return a 1 instead of 0 on whitelist, then
the original sniffer
Hello Matthew,
Wednesday, September 10, 2003, 6:36:04 PM, you wrote:
MB Dan Patnode wrote:
Should have been more specific, I'm looking for something used by larger ISPs that
gives me the confidence of volume and stability. Something attached to a name and a
phone number I can call when
DM Any (subjective g ) suggestions?
I've seen spamcop get way to aggressive over the past 6 months. They
used to be pretty accurate. We were listed for a while because our
domain name was in an MX record (for backup store and forward) for a
client ISP who had 1 user get reported to spamcop.
Does anyone know what would be less processor intensive for Declude;
whitelisting a TO address or setting custom actions for the TO address?
The end result for us is the same so it doesn't matter which one I do, I'd
just like to do the one that is less rescource intensive.
Thanks
-David
---
Title: Message
We're seeing more and more valid domains using
.biz, .us and .info. I think it's taking a while but they are finally
starting to be adopted.
-David
I posted this on the Declude Virus list and didn't get any response. (Hope
is wasn't a stupid question :-). Anybody here have anything to offer?
Thanks. -David
I just noticed on Declude site that it is compatible for use on a RAM
drive.
Haven't used one of these since DOS but trying to squeeze
Hi,
Would this cause BADHEADERS failure for bogus Message ID?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (real IP changed to protect the
guilty)
I assume it's the IP address that's bogus?
Thanks
David
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from the
Does anyone that doesn't agree with Bill have any suggestions?
We've got an Imail server on a Dell box (2650 2.2 Xeon, RAID 1/5, etc) doing
about 150,000 messages a day at roughly 45% utilization and climbing.
Looking at all the headaches of managing another box along with duplicate
purchases of
Yes, that actually would work fine. :)
Great. Is there any pricing for 'backup' versions of Declude for
'hot-spare' systems. I know it's pretty much impossible to monitor but both
copies would never be in use at the same time. We thought about just
renaming the backup server if the primary
However, the next release will allow for per-user and per-domain
whitelisting.
Great. Any idea on release date?
David
---
[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
I've noticed that many times a message will fail SPAMHEADERS and BADHEADERS
for the same problem. This is throwing off our weighting system since one
'fault' causes multiple failures. I'm thinking of upping the weight on one
of these tests and disproportionately lowering the weight on the other.
Here's an example of one a message that failed both:
X-RBL-Warning: BADHEADERS: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client
[c040400f].
X-RBL-Warning: SPAMHEADERS: This E-mail has headers consistent with spam
[c040400f]
An E-mail should never fail both tests for the same reason, since the
average business - 35%-45%
average ISP with home users - 60%-85%
---
[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
I have a user that I need to deliver 1000 held spam messages to. The user
is on a Store and Forward domain.
If I just copy the Q/D's back into the spool folder will not Declude Pro
just stop them again?
I assume I need to temporarily add a Whitelist To. Do I do this in
global.cfg for this user
They only get scanned once, so copy away.
So even with Pro, all I need to do is drop them back in the Spool folder and
they'll get automatically delivered? This worked with Standard but I
thought we ran into a problem when we tried this with Pro since it does
outbound filtering as well.
No, it will not -- Declude will automatically ignore any E-mail that has
already been scanned.
Does it look at headers and not re-scan or is Declude called in the process
before Imail writes the Q file?
David
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
Title: Message
Their "join postfixgate" link goes to the same
place with absolutely no joining instructions.
-
- Original Message -
From:
Tom Baker |
Netsmith Inc
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 11:22
AM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail]
I have been off this list for a while and just noticed two new tests in
Scott's spam stats post to the Imail forum. Can anyone tell me where to get
more info on the CYBERSITTER and MAILDEFLECTOR tests? I checked
Cybersitter's site and couldn't find anything.
Is anyone using these tests much?
I can't imagine anyone who could take spews.org seriously.
We don't. We completely ignore them. We used to have a class C on a UUNet
T1 and SPEWS had us blacklisted as dial-up IPs.
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail came from
Does anyone off hand know which RFC talks about the proper action to take on
receipt of message, or a good RFC search tool? I remeber reading something
about req'mt to store on HD. We're looking at setting up gateway server and
using SMTP Verfiy to the destination server so we don't have to
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
