[Declude.JunkMail] Filter help
We wash incoming email for a client and send it to their mail server. The server is down and will be down for some time. I want to filter all incoming email to this domain and send it to a hold directory. Line in global.cfg balcomlawfilter d:\smartermail\declude\filters\balcomlaw.txtx00 filter name: balcomlaw.txt content of the filter: HEADERS CONTAINS @balcomlaw.com also tried ALLRECIPS CONTAINS @balcomlaw.com I created a directory named balcomlaw.com in the declude directory and copied $default$.junkmail default.junkmail has this line: BALCOMLAWHOLD f:\Balcomlawhold I see the test being called but no action taken. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:IP is Blacklisted
If you are using Imail 8.2 or earlier CBL will black list. We had the same problem. The fix is to upgrade to a new version of Imail. We had to setup IIS SMTP and we are forwarding all email from imail to the IIS SMTP and send it out from there. Todd Richards wrote: Hi Everyone - Late yesterday I started seeing some bounces that our IP address was being rejected because of the following: RCPT TO generated following response: 554 Denied [SHXBL] - Denied by Spamhaus XBL - See http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=8.7.193.82 (Mode: normal) I checked and we are, in fact, listed in CBL. I went through the steps to request removal. Is there anything else I should do? I'm really not sure how we got on it anyway. Does anyone know how long it takes? I've got several people hollering at me because anything they send out is being rejected as spam. Todd --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.This is a multi-part message in MIME format. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1951 - Release Date: 02/13/09 06:51:00 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:IP is Blacklisted
I installed IIS SMTP on the same mail servers as Imail but on a different IP address. I set Imail to forward all outgoing mail to the IIS SMTP server. Imail is the only one using the IIS SMTP. The clients are still using the Imail SMTP server. Todd Richards wrote: So you set up IIS SMTP on the mail server, and are using that as your SMTP server? Todd -Original Message- From: supp...@declude.com [mailto:supp...@declude.com] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Friday, February 13, 2009 11:37 AM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] CBL:IP is Blacklisted If you are using Imail 8.2 or earlier CBL will black list. We had the same problem. The fix is to upgrade to a new version of Imail. We had to setup IIS SMTP and we are forwarding all email from imail to the IIS SMTP and send it out from there. Todd Richards wrote: Hi Everyone - Late yesterday I started seeing some bounces that our IP address was being rejected because of the following: RCPT TO generated following response: 554 Denied [SHXBL] - Denied by Spamhaus XBL - See http://www.spamhaus.org/query/bl?ip=8.7.193.82 (Mode: normal) I checked and we are, in fact, listed in CBL. I went through the steps to request removal. Is there anything else I should do? I'm really not sure how we got on it anyway. Does anyone know how long it takes? I've got several people hollering at me because anything they send out is being rejected as spam. Todd --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.This is a multi-part message in MIME format. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.10.23/1951 - Release Date: 02/13/09 06:51:00 --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to imail...@declude.com, and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] New Blacklist / Whitelist
David Dodell wrote: b) http://www.barracudacentral.org/rbl Hadn’t seen this one mentioned? Any experiences? Effective? False Positives? I'm giving this one a try ... I know Barracuda is a large manufacturer of hardware spam firewalls ... reputable company --- 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. Did you implement it yet? If yes, how is it working for you? How many points would you score the test? --- 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: AW: [Declude.JunkMail] decludeproc.exe crashing - v. 4.4.0
Did the update and we are still crashing constantly. H. Linda Pagillo wrote: Kathy, have you had any problems since i upgraded your server the other day? *From*: Hirthe, Alexander [EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent*: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 12:06 PM *To*: declude.junkmail@declude.com declude.junkmail@declude.com *Subject*: AW: [Declude.JunkMail] decludeproc.exe crashing - v. 4.4.0 We got the error here too, running Declude 3.5.59. I copied (and renamed) the 4.4.18 into the IMail directory (running 8.) and the service keeps running. Alex *Von:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Im Auftrag von *Kathy Leonard *Gesendet:* Freitag, 5. September 2008 20:42 *An:* declude.junkmail@declude.com *Betreff:* Re: [Declude.JunkMail] decludeproc.exe crashing - v. 4.4.0 It is version 4.4.0: Declude 4.4.0 Diagnostics -Original Message- From: David Barker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent 9/5/2008 2:25:22 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] decludeproc.exe crashing - v. 4.4.0 What version of Decludeproc are you running ? Check your declude\diags.txt *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Kathy Leonard *Sent:* Friday, September 05, 2008 1:31 PM *To:* declude.junkmail@declude.com *Subject:* [Declude.JunkMail] decludeproc.exe crashing - v. 4.4.0 decludeproc.exe crashes several times a day. I have set the service to restart whenever it does crash but sometimes it does not restart (or restart properly) and messages queue up in the Proc folder. We are running IMAIL 2006 (v 9) on Windows Server 2003 SP2. Any help appreciated. Kathy Leonard --- 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 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 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. Siller AG, Wannenaeckerstrasse 43, 74078 Heilbronn Vorstand: Prof. H.-F. Siller (Vorsitzender), Joern Buelow, Ralf Michi Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Armin Sohler Reg. Gericht Stuttgart, HRB 107707, Ust-Id Nr. DE145782955 --- 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 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 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] Re:Declude vs Perry (ES)
From whats posted below I draw the same conclusion as you Craig. Craig Edmonds wrote: I am not a lawyer so dont understand 100%. So Scott Perry agreed to sell the code but kept a copy anyway and when the new owners of Declude went to raise capital they found out that Scott Perry had already developed an additional product with the code they had bought. I dont see the problem myself? The new owners of declude are just protecting their interests no? Kindest Regards Craig Edmonds 123 Marbella Internet Services W: www.123marbella.com http://www.123marbella.net/ E : [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Nick Hayer *Sent:* 09 September 2008 16:16 *To:* declude.junkmail@declude.com *Subject:* [Declude.JunkMail] Re:Declude vs Perry Hi David - Below was forwarded to me - as a long time Decluder I am very disappointed in seeing something like this - -Nick http://dozierinternetlawpc.cybertriallawyer.com/computer-lawyer DECLUDE, INC. AND DNSSTUFF, LLC. v. R. SCOTT PERRY DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS (BOSTON) 1:08-cv-11072 FILED: 06/25/08 *The ownership of source code and the ownership of the code in general used to build a website is often an overlooked issue. Make sure that you have spelled out not only the ownership of the code but also the requirements relating to what code can be retrieved from the public domain. If you are using a web developer who retains ownership of source code then you risk having that developer use the code with future competitors at much lower costs and with the benefit of your intellectual capital in developing the architecture, engineering, and business processes. * Declude purchased the Defendant's anti-virus, anti-spam and anti-hijacking software in September, 2000, and sold the products as Declude Virus, Declude Junkmail, and Declude Hijack. The Defendant, R. Scott Perry, allegedly used the same source code in developing an additional product, and when the Plaintiff went to venture capitalists to raise capital, the detailed due diligence revealed that Defendant had retained a copy of the source code contrary to the provisions of the purchase agreement in 2000, and had again sold some of the same code to the Plaintiff in the new product he had launched. The Plaintiff has sued the individual Defendant for copyright infringement, breach of contract, fraud, conversion, unjust enrichment, and unfair and deceptive acts and practices. Dozier Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1190. --- 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 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 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] Decludeproc restarting several times every morning?
Noticed a few things: 1. many .vir directories left behind every morning. 2. many .sm$ files left behind. 3. decludeproc restarting several times, mostly in the morning. I think this is why the files are left behind? declude logfile gives no clue as far as I can tell. Event Type:Information Event Source:Decludeproc Event Category:None Event ID:105 Date:9/16/2007 Time:8:02:01 AM User:N/A Computer:MAIL Description: The service was started. Any suggestions where to start? Declude 4.3.46 Diagnostics Compilation Platform: IMail Copyright (c) 2000-2005 Declude, Inc. Host Name xx Daisy Chain smtp32.exe DNS Server xx Product Details JunkMail Pro EVAPro Hijack Pro Tests Defined 116 I### ADDED DSBL IP4R SPAMCOPIP4R AHBL IP4R DroneBLIP4R NJABLPROXIES IP4R FABELSOURCES IP4R FIVETENSRC IP4R FIVETEN-BULK IP4R FIVETEN-MULTISTAGE IP4R FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORTIP4R FIVETEN-MISC IP4R FIVETEN-FREE IP4R INTERSIL IP4R UCEB IP4R SORBS-HTTP IP4R SORBS-SOCKSIP4R SORBS-MISC IP4R SORBS-SMTP IP4R SORBS-ZOMBIE IP4R SORBS-DUL IP4R SORBS-BADCONF RHSBL SORBS-NOMAIL RHSBL CSMA-SBL IP4R JAMMDNSBL IP4R MXRATE-BLOCK IP4R MXRATE-SUSPICIOUS IP4R MAILPOLICE-BULKRHSBL MAILPOLICE-PORNRHSBL MAILPOLICE-HELODNSBL MAILPOLICE-REVDNS DNSBL SECURITYSAGE RHSBL AHBL-RHSBL RHSBL BONDEDSENDER IP4R ZENIP4R SPAMHAUS IP4R XBLIP4R NJABL IP4R PBLIP4R DSNRHSBL NOABUSERHSBL NOPOSTMASTER RHSBL SPAMDOMAINSSPAMDOMAINS SUBJECTSPACES7 SUBJECTSPACES SUBJECTSPACES10SUBJECTSPACES COMMENTS20 COMMENTS COMMENTS40 COMMENTS COMMENTS60 COMMENTS COMMENTS80 COMMENTS COMMENTS100COMMENTS COMMENTS120COMMENTS NOLEGITCONTENT NOLEGITCONTENT BADHEADERS BADHEADERS BASE64 BASE64 HELOBOGUS HELOVALID MAILFROM ENVFROM IPNOTINMX IPNOTINMX PERCENTPERCENT REVDNS REVDNSEXISTS ROUTINGSPAMROUTING SPAMHEADERSSPAMHEADERS CMDSPACE CMDSPACE DYNHELODYNHELO SPFPASSSPF SPFUNKNOWN SPF SPFFAILSPF AUTOWHITE1 EXTERNAL AUTOWHITE2 EXTERNAL AUTOWHITE3 EXTERNAL AUTOWHITE4 EXTERNAL HELOFILTER FILTER COUNTRYFILTER FILTER GIBBERISH FILTER GIBBERISHSUB FILTER SPAMGATE FILTER SPAMGATETRACKING FILTER SPAMGATECH FILTER SPAM-PDF FILTER SPAM-PDF2 FILTER ECARD FILTER OBFUSCATIONFILTER REVDNSBLACKLISTFILTER BADWORDFILTER FILTER BLOCKEDIP FROMFILE BADEMAIL FROMFILE SPAMCHKEXTERNAL SNIFFERGREYEXTERNAL SNIFFERGETRICH
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam reduction ?
IS - Systems Eng. (Karl Drugge) wrote: Anyone else seeing a major reduction is spam the past week ? I usually see about 14-15k messages daily, but since Monday have dropped off to about 8k... Did the recent arrests and law suits have a result this early ? *Karl Drugge* *B.S.I.T., A.S., M.C.S.E. ( NT 4.0, 2000, 2003 ), M.C.S.A. ( 2000 + 2003 ), C.C.N.A., Network+, A+* */I dream of the day when I will learn to stop asking questions to which I will regret learning the answers ( Roy Greenhilt, Order of the Stick ) /* --- 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. Been seeing the same. We normally do about 120,000 emails per day but the last week we went down to 95,000 or so. Percent of spam dropped too. We had a crazy job job hit our servers and I thought was related to that but maybe not. --- 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] OT: Clustering solution
I did get a price from Dell for 2 licenses to run a SQL cluster for an internet application. Got it in writing too. Price for the Microsoft software only: $54,000 Robert E. Spivack wrote: If using SQL Server 2005, the new database mirroring (aka "real-time log shipping") is an excellent solution if you would rather put your $$$ into SQL Server licenses (enterprise edition required) and hardware instead of a 3rd party app. An advantage of using Microsoft Database Mirroring is that you can remain on a 100% Microsoft supported solution. Assuming a clustered/mission-critical installation would want to insure they have access to PSS (Microsoft product support) for any critical situations, this could be a decisive factor over choosing a 3rd party generic clustering or C/SFS (clustered/storage file system) solution. I'd be curious to hear if Sandy or anyone has compared db mirroring to double-take and other solutions that made sense before this feature was available but may be less desirable now. Robert E. Spivack VP Sales Marketing Voicegateway.com Web Services / SPIV Technologies Group (408) 834-8560 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Sanford Whiteman Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 4:27 PM To: Sanford Whiteman Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Clustering solution Seriously, what's "low"? ...I ask because clustering's ROI is kind of a hard target. Unfortunately, I almost always find it easier to justify clustering solutions for my clients *after* they haven't heeded an initial clustering suggestion and have had outages and/or data loss (or if I get them as I clients after such an incident). We use Double-Take as a pseudo-standard, as it has broad industry support and works equally well over the local and wide area. It's going to run you upwards of $3500 for one two-server cluster. Is that "low"? I'vedemoedandamintriguedbyXGForce's eCluster http://www.xgforce.com/news_eCluster.html, which has much more accessible pricing. I plan to purchase it in place of DT for my next rollout and see if I can trust it. But for now, I can't vouch for it, though if you get into it, please let me know. :) --Sandy Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist Broadleaf Systems, a division of Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamAssassin plugs into Declude! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/SPAMC32/download/rel ease/ Defuse Dictionary Attacks: Turn Exchange or IMail mailboxes into IMail Aliases! http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/exchange2aliases/dow nload/release/ http://www.imprimia.com/products/software/freeutils/ldap2aliases/downloa d/release/ --- 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 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 came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] AUTOREVIEW OFF
I have this in the declude.cfg file but I am still getting files in the review directory. I find this feature really annoying. Is this the correct command: AUTOREVIEWOFF Is this suppose to be in the declude.cfg file or global.cfg? It seems like a larger amount of those files are legit email. Thanks... --- 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] AUTOREVIEW OFF
I appreciate your suggestion and will implement it but I find it pretty amazing that decludes error handling is crashing the program and moving a message. Decludeproc.exe crashes constantly on our server. Matt wrote: Bad idea here. This functionality was designed to keep a 'killer message' from continually crashing decludeproc.exe. Declude will move all actively processed messages into a Review folder upon shutdown or crash so that if there was a killer message, it wouldn't cause repeated issues. I have definitely run into this problem multiple times, and while the issue I experienced is apparently fixed in more recent versions, there are certainly others waiting. On the flip side, moving all such messages to Review creates a situation where one must constantly monitor it and that is far from optimal. Here's my work around. I created a script that I run on a schedule of once every 30 minutes that moves everything from Review to Proc. This way, if there is a killer message, it will only crash Declude once every 30 minutes instead of constantly in the event of AUTOREVIEW ON. I have found this to work, however one must still watch their server as having Declude crash 40 times over the space of two days can cause a general system instability, but Declude crashes on a particular message are generally not repeatable on the same message. So leave AUTOREVIEW OFF and then create a CMD file with the following command and schedule it to run once every 30 minutes, and you won't have to worry about monitoring that folder constantly, though if you continually find files in there, one of them is likely to be a killer message (which will be names in your C:\DECLUDE.GP1 file). Obviously you should customize the paths for your system. MOVE /Y F:\proc\review\*.* F:\proc With a little more work, one could write a script that checked for the file name in the C:\DECLUDE.GP1 file and if the same name is found twice in a row, that file could be removed from Review before throwing the contents back into Proc. This is in fact how Declude should approach this problem rather than just a blind copying of files into Proc, or blind moving of files into Review. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: I have this in the declude.cfg file but I am still getting files in the review directory. I find this feature really annoying. Is this the correct command: AUTOREVIEWOFF Is this suppose to be in the declude.cfg file or global.cfg? It seems like a larger amount of those files are legit email. Thanks... --- 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 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 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] how do I turn of the review function
its annoying as hell. I do not want to check the review directory for files. --- 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] Blocking these?
I am confused. The renewal cost per year is $500 but you can buy a monthly subscription for $30 a months? So monthly for $360 a year or yearly for $500. Dave Beckstrom wrote: Hi John, Thanks for the info on the monthly. I didn't know they offered that. They charge $500 a year for a renewal. I own my company so either way the $500 comes out of my pocket. I spent a lot of money in the last month, which is why I don't want to spend another $500 right now. I'd like to see it made legal to hang anyone caught spamming. :) You know what I think is the worst spam? The political spam. Any politician who sends me spam asking me to vote for them is guaranteed that I will vote against them! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John Doyle Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 1:38 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Blocking these? Dave For goodness sake, call sniffer up, they offer a monthy subscription for I think less than 30 dollars. Put it on your credit card and get your company to reimburse you next month and send them a check for the 12 months and it's done. I'd hate to think what's getting though without some sort of added filter like sniffer. John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 8:42 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Blocking these? How are you guys blocking something like the spam below? There is no URL to block on. They keep bastardizing words in the body of the email to the point where you can't hardly block based on the content. What do you guys do with these? -Original Message- From: Louis Rubin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 8:48 AM To: Subject: Chavez accused THIS THURS DAY OCTOBER 5 2006 BIG NEWS RELEASED ON CR SVF!!! DON'T MISS THIS INVESTMENT MOMENT, PLACE 'CRSVF' ON THE RA`DAR!!! T r a d e Ale rt: THURSDAY, October 05, 2006 'STOCK': CRSVF.OB Current Pri ce : $0.18 Pr evClose : $0.19 Recommendation: ST RO NG B UY WATCH THIS S TOCK GO HIGHER AND RI SE DON'T M I SS THIS IN VES TMENT MOMENT, PLACE CRSVF ON THE RA DAR!!! About Capital Reserve Canada: CRC is an oil and gas ser vices comp any based in Edmonton, Alberta. Through its wholly owned subsidiary, KCP Innovative Services, Inc., CRC offers technologically tools for use in four areas of the industry. The first aids in testing development of newly found resources; another measure existing wells' productivity; and the third hastens well abandonment, ensuring compliance with regulatory emission guidelines. The fourth, through its pro prie tary hardware and software technologies, is used to determine the profitability of coal bed methane deposits, which may be developed and sold as natural gas. CRC has a second wholly owned subsidiary, Two Hills Environmental, to assist with problem waste from oil gas companies, and provide undergro und storage. ADD THIS GE M TO YOUR PORTFOLIO AND WATCH IT TRADE ON THURSDAY, October 05, 2006 !! TR ADE SM ART AND W I N WITH CRSVF!!! Start to buy at 10:30 AM , October 05 2006 It will blow up --- 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 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 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 came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. Tounsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], andtype "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be foundat http://www.mail-archive.com.
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Analyzing junkmail log files
Try here: http://www.invariantsystems.com/ Karl Hentschel wrote: Up until upgrading from Declude 2.06 to 3.11 I had been using delog 1.08b from imagefxonline for analyzing my junkmail log files. After the upgrade it no longer works. Delog was a simple tool that emailed me daily and gave statistics for all the tests. From this I could determine which were the most effective. Does anybody have a suggestion for a replacement program to analyze junkmail log files that can email the results automatically. Which program has been the must successful? Or has anyone been successful using delog with declude 3.11? Thanks --- 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 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] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files - Microsoft confirms KB920958 bug!
Andy, Not sure if you saw it but this issue was brought up on Slashdot yesterday, so it got some exposure. Heimir Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I finally was able to get a confirmation from Microsoft Support yesterday afternoon (case: SRZ060911001854) We are aware the issue you are experiencing. A corresponding bugcheck request is currently open, and the develop team is working on this issue. However, the hotfix for this issue is not ready. 0xDF is the data pattern that NTFS returns when it has problem to decompress the file (eg. the compression fragments are corrupted and can't be decompressed). Based on my research, the actual raw data on the disk is not changed, it shows as 0xDF because the system cannot decompress the file and display the data correctly. So the corrupt is not permanent. Further more, the issue only occurs on files which containing Hexadecimal codes. Apparently, Microsoft decided not to warn people about this problem - no comment has been added to KF920958 warning people which system configurations will cause data loss (who cares if it's not permanent if you can't use your data for a few months). Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 03:21 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files - KB920958 may be bad! Answers below. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi Heimir: I've been running a number of tests, am in contact with a third Microsoft customer and some pattern seems to emerge. I also have a lead to a questionable Hotfix, but I'm trying to qualify that first. Can we first compare your systems to see what's the same (and may be relevant) and what's different: A) Disks are defined as dynamic Dynamic B) Disks are software mirrored using Win2k Disk Administration no C) The folders with the problem files have the compression attribute set! yes. D) Did the problem occur at some point after KB920958 was installed? yes, I think so. E) Do the corrupted files have a content of all 0xDF (it looks a little like an uppercase B, the German special s, or like the Beta character) Yes F) Does it appear as if only NEW files are effected? no, old files as well. BUT I think defrag ran this weekend and that would have moved some files - if that matters. G) Does it appear as if only files are effected that are close to a multiple of 4K? Yes. I broke the mirrors on my effected two servers and ran ChkDsk /F. On one server, ONE disk ChkDsk reported errors (including the files that I knew were corrupted) - virtually all of them were image file types. I reran the ChkDsk and it did NOT find errors. I then tried the second disk of the mirror and it found no errors at all. I then restablished the mirrors and my client continues to have problems with new files. On the second server, I broke the mirror, again, the ChcDsk /F repaired a long list of errors. I did NOT reestablish the mirror and did not put that disk back in service. Please contribute to the thread in the Microsoft newsgroup: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/newsgroups/dgbrowser/en-us/ defaul t.mspx?dg=microsoft.public.win2000.file_systemmid=d826afe9-2ab1-4b2f- ae11-c c27702f574a Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:29 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files Follow up: During the day I did run chkdks with no switch to check the hard drive, it reported errors and could not continue. Last night I did run chkdsk /f on the partition and it did not find any errors this time. i did process a few thumbnails and they worked fine at 12:30am today. At 8:00am they still worked but now 11:27 they dont. This was old photos that I did reprocess again. A couple of new photos that was uploaded yesterday and processed yesterday is still working fine. I can't make much sense out of this. Not sure what to next. I dont think its hardware and I am certain its not our software. So that leaves OS. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect
Removing the hot fix worked for us. What a pain in the a$$. Had to redo thousands of pictures. Heimir Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, Removing the hotfix seems to have done the trick for everyone I know of. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John T (Lists) Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 08:53 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect Have not heard anything about this in a week. What was the outcome? John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 3:45 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect Its been almost 3 hours since I removed the update and so far its working. Over the last few days we would see corrupt images very quickly. Not sure if this is working or not yet but it looks good. Heimir Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi Dean, So far I have neither experienced not heard from anyone else that Win 2003 is effected. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Lawrence Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 04:33 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect Andy, Have you heard anything about Windows 2003 Server or is it limited to 2000 Server and Pro? Thanks, Dean On 8/24/06, Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, There are now reports from at least 8 customers in the US and UK that after Hotfix KB920958 numerous Windows 2000 Server and Pro systems are garbling certain new files. -- __ Dean Lawrence, CIO/Partner Internet Data Technology 888.GET.IDT1 ext. 701 * fax: 888.438.4381 http://www.idatatech.com/ Corporate Internet Development and Marketing Specialists --- 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 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 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 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 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 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] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files
Follow up: During the day I did run chkdks with no switch to check the hard drive, it reported errors and could not continue. Last night I did run chkdsk /f on the partition and it did not find any errors this time. i did process a few thumbnails and they worked fine at 12:30am today. At 8:00am they still worked but now 11:27 they dont. This was old photos that I did reprocess again. A couple of new photos that was uploaded yesterday and processed yesterday is still working fine. I can't make much sense out of this. Not sure what to next. I dont think its hardware and I am certain its not our software. So that leaves OS. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later the data is corrupted. I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the correct data through a share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always see the byte pattern of 0xDF. I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems Windows replaced bad clusters in file . But, the problem recurred the next day. Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the data it would either get good or bad data. However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old). So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 MB large. Now I'm wondering if this is some software issue. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in your \Declude directory. This should contain the version and diagnostics. The valid options on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are: Decludeproc -v displays the version and build Decludeproc -i installs the decludeproc service Decludeproc -u uninstalls the decludeproc service David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Dave - That's what I call catch 22: D:\IMaildecludeproc -diag Invalid command line parameter: -install Install Declude -diagPrint diagnostics Hm - so let's see, after -install, I used -diag to figure out what's wrong. But, -diag is invalid. The ony valid parameters are... -install and -diag? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Hi Dave, thanks. Next question: I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2: AUTOFORGE ON BANEZIPEXTS ON If I recall correctly, the idea was that: BANZIPEXTS OFF # BANEXT EZIP BANEZIPEXTS ON would PERMIT banned extensions inside zipped files (where they could be scanned), but DENY banned extensions if they were contained inside encrypted zipped files. Where those options forgotten in your config file - or are they no longer available in Version 3? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 02:43 PM
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files - KB920958 may be bad!
Answers below. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi Heimir: I've been running a number of tests, am in contact with a third Microsoft customer and some pattern seems to emerge. I also have a lead to a questionable Hotfix, but I'm trying to qualify that first. Can we first compare your systems to see what's the same (and may be relevant) and what's different: A) Disks are defined as dynamic Dynamic B) Disks are software mirrored using Win2k Disk Administration no C) The folders with the problem files have the compression attribute set! yes. D) Did the problem occur at some point after KB920958 was installed? yes, I think so. E) Do the corrupted files have a content of all 0xDF (it looks a little like an uppercase B, the German special s, or like the Beta character) Yes F) Does it appear as if only NEW files are effected? no, old files as well. BUT I think defrag ran this weekend and that would have moved some files - if that matters. G) Does it appear as if only files are effected that are close to a multiple of 4K? Yes. I broke the mirrors on my effected two servers and ran ChkDsk /F. On one server, ONE disk ChkDsk reported errors (including the files that I knew were corrupted) - virtually all of them were image file types. I reran the ChkDsk and it did NOT find errors. I then tried the second disk of the mirror and it found no errors at all. I then restablished the mirrors and my client continues to have problems with new files. On the second server, I broke the mirror, again, the ChcDsk /F repaired a long list of errors. I did NOT reestablish the mirror and did not put that disk back in service. Please contribute to the thread in the Microsoft newsgroup: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/newsgroups/dgbrowser/en-us/defaul t.mspx?dg=microsoft.public.win2000.file_systemmid=d826afe9-2ab1-4b2f-ae11-c c27702f574a Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:29 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files Follow up: During the day I did run chkdks with no switch to check the hard drive, it reported errors and could not continue. Last night I did run chkdsk /f on the partition and it did not find any errors this time. i did process a few thumbnails and they worked fine at 12:30am today. At 8:00am they still worked but now 11:27 they dont. This was old photos that I did reprocess again. A couple of new photos that was uploaded yesterday and processed yesterday is still working fine. I can't make much sense out of this. Not sure what to next. I dont think its hardware and I am certain its not our software. So that leaves OS. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later the data is corrupted. I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the correct data through a share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always see the byte pattern of 0xDF. I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems Windows replaced bad clusters in file . But, the problem recurred the next day. Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the data it would either get good or bad data. However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old). So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 MB large. Now I'm wondering if this is some software issue. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect
We are running the same type of site on both Win2003 and Win2000 servers. Only the Win2000 server is having this problem. About an hour ago I did remove this update so its too early to tell if it corrects the problem or not. H. Dean Lawrence wrote: Andy, Have you heard anything about Windows 2003 Server or is it limited to 2000 Server and Pro? Thanks, Dean On 8/24/06, Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, There are now reports from at least 8 customers in the US and UK that after Hotfix KB920958 numerous Windows 2000 Server and Pro systems are garbling certain new files. --- 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] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect
Its been almost 3 hours since I removed the update and so far its working. Over the last few days we would see corrupt images very quickly. Not sure if this is working or not yet but it looks good. Heimir Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi Dean, So far I have neither experienced not heard from anyone else that Win 2003 is effected. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean Lawrence Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 04:33 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Warning -- August Security Hotfix KB920958 is suspect Andy, Have you heard anything about Windows 2003 Server or is it limited to 2000 Server and Pro? Thanks, Dean On 8/24/06, Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, There are now reports from at least 8 customers in the US and UK that after Hotfix KB920958 numerous Windows 2000 Server and Pro systems are garbling certain new files. -- __ Dean Lawrence, CIO/Partner Internet Data Technology 888.GET.IDT1 ext. 701 * fax: 888.438.4381 http://www.idatatech.com/ Corporate Internet Development and Marketing Specialists --- 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 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 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] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files
we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later the data is corrupted. I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the correct data through a share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always see the byte pattern of 0xDF. I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems Windows replaced bad clusters in file . But, the problem recurred the next day. Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the data it would either get good or bad data. However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old). So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 MB large. Now I'm wondering if this is some software issue. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in your \Declude directory. This should contain the version and diagnostics. The valid options on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are: Decludeproc -v displays the version and build Decludeproc -i installs the decludeproc service Decludeproc -u uninstalls the decludeproc service David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Dave - That's what I call catch 22: D:\IMaildecludeproc -diag Invalid command line parameter: -install Install Declude -diagPrint diagnostics Hm - so let's see, after -install, I used -diag to figure out what's wrong. But, -diag is invalid. The ony valid parameters are... -install and -diag? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Hi Dave, thanks. Next question: I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2: AUTOFORGE ON BANEZIPEXTS ON If I recall correctly, the idea was that: BANZIPEXTS OFF # BANEXT EZIP BANEZIPEXTS ON would PERMIT banned extensions inside zipped files (where they could be scanned), but DENY banned extensions if they were contained inside encrypted zipped files. Where those options forgotten in your config file - or are they no longer available in Version 3? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 02:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew The Program Files\Declude is a temp directory that can be deleted after the install. The original purpose of this directory was to make available the latest configs as we do not overwrite your configs. This has since been removed in version 4.x where you will find a \Declude\Resources directory which has the same purpose. David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:36 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files
The only thing that comes to mind is the Microsoft updates from last week. But I do think I installed those on Wednesday. H. John T (Lists) wrote: Any updates or patches recently applied? John T eServices For You Seek, and ye shall find! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 3:46 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later the data is corrupted. I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the correct data through a share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always see the byte pattern of 0xDF. I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems Windows replaced bad clusters in file . But, the problem recurred the next day. Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the data it would either get good or bad data. However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old). So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 MB large. Now I'm wondering if this is some software issue. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in your \Declude directory. This should contain the version and diagnostics. The valid options on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are: Decludeproc -v displays the version and build Decludeproc -i installs the decludeproc service Decludeproc -u uninstalls the decludeproc service David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Dave - That's what I call catch 22: D:\IMaildecludeproc -diag Invalid command line parameter: -install Install Declude -diagPrint diagnostics Hm - so let's see, after -install, I used -diag to figure out what's wrong. But, -diag is invalid. The ony valid parameters are... -install and -diag? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Hi Dave, thanks. Next question: I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2: AUTOFORGE ON BANEZIPEXTS ON If I recall correctly, the idea was that: BANZIPEXTS OFF # BANEXT EZIP BANEZIPEXTS ON would PERMIT banned extensions inside zipped files (where they could be scanned), but DENY banned extensions if they were contained inside encrypted zipped files. Where those options forgotten in your config file - or are they no longer available in Version 3? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 02:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files
No virus scanner on this machine. I dont see any large files being corrupted only small files like you see too. The files we are having problems with is all small jpg files. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, Yes it started around this weekend - and, in our case too, those are small JPEG/GIF thumbnail images of up to 4K (so probably exactly one allocation unit). I've asked my client to intentionally change the compression factor to create the files slightly larger than 4096 bytes - to see if this theory holds true. It's pretty unlikely that no larger files would be effected by a hardware error, considering that they should have a higher chance to be effected (due to their larger size). Are you using an on-access virus scanner? We use McAfee - just trying to cover every base. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 06:46 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: Disk pattern 0xDF in files we are having the exact problem on one of our servers. We create small thumbnail pictures about 4k in size. They work fine at first but later they are corrupted. Windows 2000 server. I have no clue what it could be at this time. It started around this weekend I think. Please keep me posted if you find something. H. Andy Schmidt wrote: Hi, I have two older servers (but not same models or same purchase years) running Windows 2000 with mirrored disks (software Raid-1). Two days ago a customer noticed that they uploaded files to their FTP space, and initially they see the files on the browser - but a while later the data is corrupted. I investigated - and oddly enough the problem so far always seems to appear with small thumbnail graphics files that occupy less than 4095 bytes. When I inspect the files I may see the correct data through a share, but if I access the files through some other method, I always see the byte pattern of 0xDF. I ran a standalone checkdisk a day ago against the first server, sure enough, it reported and fixed several problems Windows replaced bad clusters in file . But, the problem recurred the next day. Now, my first instinct was that ONE of the two mirrored disks was truly on its way out and depending on which drive was being used to read the data it would either get good or bad data. However, a day later a second customer had the same complaint but on an entirely different machine. In this case, the error occurs with a set of relatively new SCSI drives (not even a year old). So now that I'm looking at two totally different server models, from entirely different years, one with fairly new disks - what are the chances that the SAME problem and symptom would show at the same time. Both on software mirrored disks, in both cases files that are less than 4 MB large. Now I'm wondering if this is some software issue. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Barker Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:53 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew When the decludeproc services start under your windows services and the first email is processed. A file call diags.txt is created in your \Declude directory. This should contain the version and diagnostics. The valid options on decludeproc from the cmd prompt are: Decludeproc -v displays the version and build Decludeproc -i installs the decludeproc service Decludeproc -u uninstalls the decludeproc service David B www.declude.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 3:43 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Dave - That's what I call catch 22: D:\IMaildecludeproc -diag Invalid command line parameter: -install Install Declude -diagPrint diagnostics Hm - so let's see, after -install, I used -diag to figure out what's wrong. But, -diag is invalid. The ony valid parameters are... -install and -diag? Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 03:09 PM To: declude.junkmail@declude.com Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Trying to install Declude 3.1.20 anew Hi Dave, thanks. Next question: I noticed that your Virus.CFG is missing two options from Version 2: AUTOFORGE ON BANEZIPEXTS ON If I recall correctly, the idea was that: BANZIPEXTS OFF # BANEXT EZIP BANEZIPEXTS ON would PERMIT banned extensions inside
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] F-Prot Licensing
Markus Gufler wrote: This pricing is just another way of saying Go Away. Suggestions? Markus --- 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. I am going away for sure. Its NO way I will pay that much money to use a command line scanner. There are no difference between the mail server version and the regular version besides the license. Its a rip off. I will NOT spend 1750 bucks on Declude for that matter. I guess I will be busy finding replacements. --- 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] No action taken
No response from Declude yet? Its been days. Are they still in business? Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Why would no action been taken on this email. We hold on 100. From Declude log: 06/04/2006 17:38:44.987 q60eb0182d92b.smd Triggered COUNTRIES CONTAINS filter COUNTRYFILTER on ES [weight-10]. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.003 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 60. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.112 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 70. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter REVDNSBLACKLIST: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=80) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter BADWORDFILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=30) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd SPAMCOP:70 FIVETENSRC:30 SORBS-DUL:35 COUNTRYFILTER:10 SNIFFERGETRICH:100 . Total weight = 245. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN Received: from jose-mih7wjftkx [62.42.134.246] by xxx with ESMTP (SMTPD-8.22) id A0EC1404; Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:38:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 22:38:39 -0060 From: Rene Benjamin [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: The Bat! (3.69.9) Personal Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Subject: Under The Radar Equity Alert MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Declude-Sender: [62.42.134.246] X-Declude-Spoolname: D60eb0182d92b.smd X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, FIVETENSRC, SORBS-DUL, NOLEGITCONTENT, IPNOTINMX, COUNTRYFILTER, SNIFFERGETRICH, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, CATCHALLMAILS [245] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: U X-UIDL: 440029386 X-IMail-ThreadID: 60eb0182d92b --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude EVA] --- 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] No action taken
Thanks, good to know you guys still are paying attention :) Heimir David Barker wrote: Ok, so you prompted me to a knee-jerk reaction ... Yes, we are still in business :) Currently investigating the problem. Again it is a high priority and we will notify you as soon as we have found the cause of the problem. Thanks David B www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 4:29 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] No action taken No response from Declude yet? Its been days. Are they still in business? Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Why would no action been taken on this email. We hold on 100. From Declude log: 06/04/2006 17:38:44.987 q60eb0182d92b.smd Triggered COUNTRIES CONTAINS filter COUNTRYFILTER on ES [weight-10]. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.003 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 60. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.112 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 70. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter REVDNSBLACKLIST: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=80) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter BADWORDFILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=30) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd SPAMCOP:70 FIVETENSRC:30 SORBS-DUL:35 COUNTRYFILTER:10 SNIFFERGETRICH:100 . Total weight = 245. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN Received: from jose-mih7wjftkx [62.42.134.246] by xxx with ESMTP (SMTPD-8.22) id A0EC1404; Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:38:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 22:38:39 -0060 From: Rene Benjamin [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: The Bat! (3.69.9) Personal Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Subject: Under The Radar Equity Alert MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Declude-Sender: [62.42.134.246] X-Declude-Spoolname: D60eb0182d92b.smd X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, FIVETENSRC, SORBS-DUL, NOLEGITCONTENT, IPNOTINMX, COUNTRYFILTER, SNIFFERGETRICH, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, CATCHALLMAILS [245] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: U X-UIDL: 440029386 X-IMail-ThreadID: 60eb0182d92b --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude EVA] --- 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 came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude EVA] --- 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: AW: [Declude.JunkMail] No action taken
It seems to be obvious that this is a Declude problem with so many reports. Why no response from Declude yet? H. Matt wrote: Markus, Your headers show that it was also a null sender for the messages that bypassed your weights. Also curiously, you are logging in your headers the inorout variable and it shows the message as being outgoing: X-Note: Sent from - [No Reverse DNS] ([210.212.188.106]) outgoing. It appears that Declude is treating all null senders as outgoing, which would then use actions contained in your Global.cfg instead of a JunkMail file, and I'm guessing that you don't have any actions defined in your Global.cfg? Maybe that is the source of the bug. I don't recall this ever happening with 2.x and before, so maybe it's a change of behavior in 3+. Declude??? Matt Markus Gufler wrote: (reposting the same message without attachments) Hi After reading this thread and have seen 3 spam messages in my inbox who has final results-lines in the header with more then 200% of my hold weight I've made some research: Exactly the same is happening here with Declude 3.1.0 and Imail 8.15 from 2006-06-04 20:00:00 GMT+1 on. I have the same actions for in- and outgoing messages in my config files. Normaly a message in v3+ is (MID) logged with 6 lines. Each message with the final action NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN has only 2 lines in the logfile 06/04/2006 20:00:37.719 q1fa255d9003021bd.smd CBL:10 SPAMCOP:20 ... . Total weight = 360. 06/04/2006 20:00:37.719 q1fa255d9003021bd.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN With this final weight the defined action is HOLD. I've noted also that this two lines are looking nearly like a whitelisted message: 06/04/2006 19:31:27.015 q18de1b3b00b21c63.smd Action(s) taken for [EMAIL PROTECTED] = WHITELISTED [LAST ACTION=WHITELISTED] 06/04/2006 19:31:27.015 q18de1b3b00b21c63.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN So it seems to me that something is whitelisting this type of message but I don't know what. Following my logfiles arround 400 spam each one with a final result between 200 and 400% of the defined hold weight has passed the filter instead of being HOLD. Markus -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von John Shacklett Gesendet: Montag, 5. Juni 2006 13:37 An: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Betreff: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] No action taken This morning I'm seeing a flood of stock spam with scores that are more than double my delete weight getting through with no action taken. I'm looking at one right now with a score of 67, and in my scheme we delete at 30. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Sunday, 04 June 2006 8:21 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] No action taken I was noticing the other day on some version of 4.x that bounce messages for a domain that should have been using the settings in my $Default$.JunkMail failed to take those actions. Typically I do per-domain configs, but a few I just have using my $Default$.JunkMail. I noticed this as soon as I upgraded to 4.x, and I'm pretty sure it is a bug. I am not sure if it only affects bounce messages or all messages for those domains (note that all of my domains are gatewayed from the Declude box so they may be treated differently from locally hosted E-mail. I believe that putting the actions in your Global.cfg would take action on this stuff. Global.cfg is meant for outgoing E-mail actions. While this was clearly incoming E-mail and not the way things used to work with 2.x and before, I'm pretty sure that this will take care of the issue. When I get some time to look into this further I'll probably report the bug to Declude. I'm pretty sure that I have seen several other such posts that might have been caused by this change in behavior. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Why would no action been taken on this email. We hold on 100. From Declude log: 06/04/2006 17:38:44.987 q60eb0182d92b.smd Triggered COUNTRIES CONTAINS filter COUNTRYFILTER on ES [weight-10]. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.003 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 60. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.112 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 70. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter REVDNSBLACKLIST: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=80) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter BADWORDFILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=30) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd SPAMCOP:70 FIVETENSRC:30 SORBS-DUL:35 COUNTRYFILTER:10 SNIFFERGETRICH:100 . Total weight = 245. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN Received: from jose-mih7wjftkx [62.42.134.246
[Declude.JunkMail] No action taken
Why would no action been taken on this email. We hold on 100. From Declude log: 06/04/2006 17:38:44.987 q60eb0182d92b.smd Triggered COUNTRIES CONTAINS filter COUNTRYFILTER on ES [weight-10]. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.003 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 60. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.112 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter: Set max weight to 70. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter REVDNSBLACKLIST: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=80) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Filter BADWORDFILTER: Skipping E-mail with a current weight of 245 (=30) 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd SPAMCOP:70 FIVETENSRC:30 SORBS-DUL:35 COUNTRYFILTER:10 SNIFFERGETRICH:100 . Total weight = 245. 06/04/2006 17:38:45.159 q60eb0182d92b.smd Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = NO ACTIONS WERE TAKEN Received: from jose-mih7wjftkx [62.42.134.246] by xxx with ESMTP (SMTPD-8.22) id A0EC1404; Sun, 04 Jun 2006 17:38:36 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 22:38:39 -0060 From: Rene Benjamin [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: The Bat! (3.69.9) Personal Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Subject: Under The Radar Equity Alert MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Declude-Sender: [62.42.134.246] X-Declude-Spoolname: D60eb0182d92b.smd X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, FIVETENSRC, SORBS-DUL, NOLEGITCONTENT, IPNOTINMX, COUNTRYFILTER, SNIFFERGETRICH, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, CATCHALLMAILS [245] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: U X-UIDL: 440029386 X-IMail-ThreadID: 60eb0182d92b --- 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 4 changes ... worried...
At that price we will be looking for alternatives. Considering the cost of declude + sniffer puts us close to $2k. At that price we have many other options and will explore them for sure. H. Scott Fisher wrote: I can tell you at $1450 a year for my Declude for Imail, isn't going to fly very well here. Ironically, one of the reasons I chose Declude in the beginning was the lower maintenance cost. The upfront cost was higher than the alternatives, but the ongoing price was very affordable. I belive the product was the best product for Imail integration at the time I purchaed it. I also have to say that the lack of the product's advancement has irritated me. Yes there was the change to a service, and yes SmarterMail support was implemented. But the base product has not not improved in virus/vulnerability detection or spam detection in a year. I think that change was the addition of the dynhelo internal test. And I don't use that test because run a third party test that is more effective. Looking at the release logs, the last substantial virus/vulnerability detection or spam additions were in September 2004 with version 1.80. If the price is going up that much, I really expect the program to be getting better. - Original Message - From: Che Vilnonis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 9:54 AM Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] declude 4 changes ... worried... I agree. I just emailed to see what the upgrade price would be for just Junkmail... and I'm not sure that is even possible to purchase it alone. Sounds like Declude has been following Ipswitch's model for bundling/pricing software. ~Ché -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott Fisher Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 10:43 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] declude 4 changes ... worried... So I thought I'd go web browsing on the Declude site and see what is up with Declude 4. I'm a Virus Pro and Junkmail Pro licensee on Imail. Going forward Declude 4 is the entire suite (Virus Pro, Junkmail Pro and Hijaak). Kevin's post mentions that Declude 3 will be supported. Although long term how long will they support two different code sets? I'd say my long-term gut feeling isn't good. Next I look through the purchase page. Declude 4 for Imail is now only available for a $1450 Annual Subscription. Ouch. The last time I paid maintenance for Declude it was $265. That's a bump. (Essentially having only one domain here), That is mighty pricey especially compared to the Declude for Smartmail 1 domain price of $199. Don't get me wrong, I really like the Declude prodcut. It's so flexible that you can do many different things... I just can't see how smaller entities like me are going to positively affected by these changes. - Scott Fisher Director of IT Farm Progress Companies 191 S Gary Ave Carol Stream, IL 60188 630-462-2323 This email message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Although Farm Progress Companies has taken reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachments. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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 EVA 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 EVA 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 4 changes ... worried...
John T (Lists) wrote: I think we need to stop jumping to conclusions and wait for an official response from Declude (which should have already happened.) What? No gossip and no drama? I might as well just get a real job then :) H. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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] Sniffer Email List
Chris Anton wrote: How do i get onto the sniffer email list? -Anton --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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. Ah, that list is like a secret society. You have to commit for live and you have to be willing to sacrifice yourself for the protection of the order. Or you could do this: *Mailing List - *If you'd like you can also subscribe to our user support list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to the sniffer list send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *with *subscribe sniffer [your name] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]* in the body. If you click on the link remember to change [your name] appropriately. To unsubscribe from the sniffer list send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with *unsubscribe sniffer* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the body of your message. List archive: *http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (connection to www.mail-archive.com added 20040201). --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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] OT - Server Watching.
We use hostmonitor. Tons of different tests. Plus is very affordable. H. Jerod M. Bennett wrote: Hey, I know this is off topic, but I respect the knowledge and opinions of the people on this list. What software / services do you guys use to watch your servers for up/down status? -Jerry --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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 EVA 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] Left over D*.SM$ files in proc\work
I see the same thing. A few left behind almost every day. H. Goran Jovanovic wrote: Hi, I have noticed that I am getting left over D*.SM$ files in the proc\work directory. I am getting 2 to 4 of these per day on a volume of 15-20K messages a day. Windows Server 2003 IMail 8.15 HF2 Declude 3.0.5.23 Sniffer, invURUBL, F-Prot, McAfee No on access Virus Scanner When I check the logs I find In the DECLUDE Log 01/21/2006 06:56:32.233 q1ffa301900405c91.smd Couldn't move/copy ATTACH data file [183] 01/21/2006 07:01:37.778 q1ffa301900405c91.smd Couldn't rename SMD to SM$ [183]. Priority back to 32. Error String: [Cannot create a file when that file already exists.] [D:\spool\proc\work\D1ffa301900405c91.smd] [D:\spool\proc\work\D1ffa301900405c91.sm$] And in the Virus log 01/21/2006 07:01:37.778 q1ffa301900405c91.smd Couldn't rename SMD to SM$ [183]. Priority back to 32. Error String: [Cannot create a file when that file already exists.] [D:\spool\proc\work\D1ffa301900405c91.smd] [D:\spool\proc\work\D1ffa301900405c91.sm$] Other times I will only find this message in the DECLUDE.LOG file. 01/15/2006 19:21:39.160 qe70539e800a6f12a.smd Couldn't move/copy ATTACH data file [32] Anyone have any ideas about this? Thanks Goran Jovanovic Omega Network Solutions --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude EVA 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] Country filter broken in 3.05.05?
Our service agreement expired but I still have broken product. That suck... Now im sad :) David Barker wrote: The COUNTRY issue was corrected in 3.0.5.9 David B www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:05 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Country filter broken in 3.05.05? today I noticed that several emails failed the country filter. Emails that should not have been and has not been in the past. does the country filter work correctly in 3.05.05? --- 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 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 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] Country filter broken in 3.05.05?
Oh, I know. I would be disappointed if you didn't. I hope you noticed my smiley face. David Barker wrote: Heimir, You know I am not going to resist saying this. http://www.declude.com/Purchase.asp?cat=13 David B www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 4:08 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Country filter broken in 3.05.05? Our service agreement expired but I still have broken product. That suck... Now im sad :) David Barker wrote: The COUNTRY issue was corrected in 3.0.5.9 David B www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:05 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Country filter broken in 3.05.05? today I noticed that several emails failed the country filter. Emails that should not have been and has not been in the past. does the country filter work correctly in 3.05.05? --- 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 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 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 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 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] DecludeProc crashing still
I have seen the same thing. Decludeproc crash while im on the server. Running 3.05.05 Mark Smith wrote: I'm not 100% sure if people aren't noticing Decludeproc crashing. The installer sets the service recovery to restart in 0 seconds. So, would a few of you mind checking your System event logs and look for Event ID 7031 and 26. I want to triple check that I'm the only one getting these. Here's what happens... ALL FOUR of my declude servers are seeing this. I've renamed virus.cfg to virus.bak, I've removed all external tests, removed the biggest body filter test. Still crashes. Every version of Declude Proc is crashing AND CPU time is always at 100% with DecludeProc usually at the top. Windows 2003 Server STD, Imail Dell PowerEdge 1650 Dual Proc 1.4Ghz, 2GB RAM. VERSION 3.05.11 THREADS 15 WAITFORMAIL 2000 === Event Type: Information Event Source: Application Popup Event Category: None Event ID: 26 Date: 10/25/2005 Time: 2:24:40 PM User: N/A Computer: CTCMX02 Description: Application popup: decludeproc.exe - Application Error : The instruction at 0x7c8120d0 referenced memory at 0x018e. The memory could not be read. Click on OK to terminate the program Click on CANCEL to debug the program For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. === Event Type: Error Event Source: Service Control Manager Event Category: None Event ID: 7031 Date: 10/25/2005 Time: 2:13:58 PM User: N/A Computer: CTCMX02 Description: The Decludeproc service terminated unexpectedly. It has done this 1 time(s). The following corrective action will be taken in 12 milliseconds: Restart the service. For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp. --- 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 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] OT: New DNS Server
Dave Beckstrom wrote: I swear by simpleDNS. It’s inexpensive too. You can set up a master/slave relationship where you update one DNS server and then the change is automatically replicated to the secondary DNS server. I’m not talking just zone transfers. For example, In MS DNS you still have to define your domain in the secondary DNS before the secondary will synch with the primary. In SimpleDNS you literally only ever have to touch the primary DNS (you can forget about the secondary. It takes care of itself) and the secondary is automatically updated with everything. Moreover, simpleDNS by default can provide SPF records for all your domains without you having to create them. You still have the option of creating your own SPF records and letting the default SPF apply only to domains where you have not explicitly created a record. SimpleDNS also has a nice performance graph running so that you can see how heavy your DNS server is being hit. It’s a sweet package and definitely worth a look. I agree. Been using SimpleDNS for years without any problems. --- 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 3.0.3 update
Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I am still holding off though on this Beta - I just do not see it as trustworthy and Declude is not forthcoming with its bugs. For example I just saw some posts about issues w/multiprocessor environments - which is scary because that is what I have, you have just uncovered another bug, Nick, While that comment has some historical truth to it I don't think it accurately reflects the situation at hand with this beta. Declude posted the issue to their beta site about the multi-processor issue within a reasonable time after I reported/verified it with them. Declude has been doing a pretty good job on the beta communication including notifying the beta participants when new builds are available. Darrell So, we can not really use this list to know whats going on with the beta since they do not post it here? We have to use the beta site? --- 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 3.0.3 update
Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: So, we can not really use this list to know whats going on with the beta since they do not post it here? We have to use the beta site? No, I would not say that. I post each and every issue I have with the beta to this list as well as to Declude. I would hope that others do they same as well. What Declude does is just post the issues and the status of the issue on their web site. Including the old issues that were fixed in previous versions. I would assume that if one was running the beta they would check the beta site often - I know that I do. Darrell - invURIBL - Intelligent URI Spam filtering for Declude. Try it today - http://www.invariantsystems.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. Ok, cool. I am have not installed the beta yet since server is running fine right now, I don't have much time to play However, I am keeping a close tab on the beta. I will keep an eye on the beta site too. Thanks for the update... --- 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] IMail 8.02
Its been over 2.5 months to fix a problem that is mission critical for many of us. Pleased with the result? Sorry but this is getting stupid. Pleased with the result will be its working. It means it does not crash our server. It means we keep our clients. It sounds like Declude is making a *new* version instead of fixing the problem now. I really dont have time to wait until Declude thinks they have a better product - I need a working product now. Amazing how fast a company can go down the tube. Mine included when products does not work. Bill Billman wrote: It does appear that some people have been missing the updates regarding the Declude/IMail 8.2 situation. Declude has been working on a new version in order to deal with the changes brought about with the introduction if IMail 8.2. This has involved some major changes to the application and to quote Scott Perry ‘Although it is taking a bit longer than expected, I think you will be pleased with the results.’ The next version of Declude will execute as a multi threaded Windows service. The configuration files and logging will remain as is so there will minimal effort to upgrade. Internal testing is underway and there are plans to enter open beta soon. Bill Billman Director of Engineering Declude - internet security software 978.499.2933 office 603.930.4886 mobile 978.477.8930 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 12:32 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IMail 8.02 I just noticed that it was posted June 5. Whats the deal? 2.5 months later and no update? Bring back Scott please. This is not good enough. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Well, good to know. I spent this weekend troubleshooting this problem. Our SMTP process would blow up then the SMTP becomes unresponsive. Almost like tar pitting. I wish I had known this Friday :( I hope this is the number 1 priority for them. Heimir Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Declude posted this a couple weeks back and are still working on testing the new version that resolves the issues with 8.2x http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg24792.html Darrell -- DLAnalyzer - Comprehensive reporting for Declude Junkmail and Virus. Download it today - http://www.invariantsystems.com Orillia ProNet Administration writes: Hi. I am running Imail 8.15hf2 as my mail server and Declude 1.82. I want to upgrade to Imail 8.21. any issues with that and Declude 1.82? -- Regards, Orillia ProNet Administration Orillia ProNet 22A Colborne Street West Orillia, Ontairo L3V 2Y3 705-329-3949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- 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 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 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 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 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] IMail 8.02
Do we need Imail 8.2? Its besides the point. We do pay for service agreements and we do expect and demand that the software we pay for. When an error that shuts down the mail server is found it must be fixed ASAP. waiting for over 2.5 months so far is unacceptable. I assume that Declude will extend our service contracts for the time when they had a faulty product on the market. Markus Gufler wrote: I've running Imail 8.15 and the Declude 1.82 here and everything is running fine. Do you realy need Imail 8.2? Declude as a multi-threaded service sound very promising. Markus -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 3:32 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IMail 8.02 Its been over 2.5 months to fix a problem that is mission critical for many of us. Pleased with the result? Sorry but this is getting stupid. Pleased with the result will be its working. It means it does not crash our server. It means we keep our clients. It sounds like Declude is making a *new* version instead of fixing the problem now. I really dont have time to wait until Declude thinks they have a better product - I need a working product now. Amazing how fast a company can go down the tube. Mine included when products does not work. Bill Billman wrote: It does appear that some people have been missing the updates regarding the Declude/IMail 8.2 situation. Declude has been working on a new version in order to deal with the changes brought about with the introduction if IMail 8.2. This has involved some major changes to the application and to quote Scott Perry 'Although it is taking a bit longer than expected, I think you will be pleased with the results.' The next version of Declude will execute as a multi threaded Windows service. The configuration files and logging will remain as is so there will minimal effort to upgrade. Internal testing is underway and there are plans to enter open beta soon. Bill Billman Director of Engineering Declude - internet security software 978.499.2933 office 603.930.4886 mobile 978.477.8930 fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.declude.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 12:32 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IMail 8.02 I just noticed that it was posted June 5. Whats the deal? 2.5 months later and no update? Bring back Scott please. This is not good enough. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Well, good to know. I spent this weekend troubleshooting this problem. Our SMTP process would blow up then the SMTP becomes unresponsive. Almost like tar pitting. I wish I had known this Friday :( I hope this is the number 1 priority for them. Heimir Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Declude posted this a couple weeks back and are still working on testing the new version that resolves the issues with 8.2x http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/ms g24792.htm l Darrell -- DLAnalyzer - Comprehensive reporting for Declude Junkmail and Virus. Download it today - http://www.invariantsystems.com Orillia ProNet Administration writes: Hi. I am running Imail 8.15hf2 as my mail server and Declude 1.82. I want to upgrade to Imail 8.21. any issues with that and Declude 1.82? -- Regards, Orillia ProNet Administration Orillia ProNet 22A Colborne Street West Orillia, Ontairo L3V 2Y3 705-329-3949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- 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 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 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 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 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
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IMail 8.2
Yup, I am frustrated. I spent hours working on this problem over the weekend. We went down multiple times and got tons of complaints from clients. I guess I missed the email from Declude to all clients notifying us about this known error. I went back and looked but couldnt find it. I am also guessing that they are not really working to fix the problem but instead creating a new better product. I find that unacceptable it thats the case. I need a working program now, not a better one in the future. 2.5 months to fix this bug sounds crazy to me. Andy Schmidt wrote: Heimir, I understand everyone's level of frustration - I think THAT is actually a constructive suggestion. We can't do anything about how long this take, but at least people would feel treated fairly. I think your email deserves serious consideration. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 12:39 PM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IMail 8.02 Do we need Imail 8.2? Its besides the point. We do pay for service agreements and we do expect and demand that the software we pay for. When an error that shuts down the mail server is found it must be fixed ASAP. waiting for over 2.5 months so far is unacceptable. I assume that Declude will extend our service contracts for the time when they had a faulty product on the market. --- 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 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 and IMail 8.2
Thank you for the update. It concern me that I can't find the email notifying your customer about this bug. Could you tell me when it was sent so I can find it and make sure I am not holding this type of emails. They are critical to us so I will put some effort in making sure I get them. Its been over 2.5 months. The fix will not be available for some time according your email. This is a very long time and frankly I think it makes Declude look very bad. I think there have been plenty of complaints about Declude lately. It seems that your reputation is getting a little tarnished. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for you posts. We understand your frustration; here are the facts so there is no confusion. 1. This is NOT a bug in Declude. Ipswitch made changes to their IMail architecture, making it incompatible with Declude and this requires a fundamental re-write of Declude not a 10 minute fix. 2. As soon as we were aware of these changes we began development to modify Declude to work with IMail 8.2. 3. It has been our priority and focus since we first identified the problem. 4. In order to deliver a quality product, sufficient testing needs to be done to ensure customer satisfaction. Since identification of the issue additional patches have been released by Ipswitch meaning additional testing and development has been required. 5. This is not an issue of interim releases as Declude product architecture has had to change making it very different from earlier versions of Declude. 6. This is not an issue of having Scott back as the situation would be no different from today. We are in regular consultation with Scott and we all agree as to the product direction and problem resolution. If there was an easier, faster, simpler way in which we could achieve a resolution we would do it. Barry --- 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 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] IMail 8.02
Well, good to know. I spent this weekend troubleshooting this problem. Our SMTP process would blow up then the SMTP becomes unresponsive. Almost like tar pitting. I wish I had known this Friday :( I hope this is the number 1 priority for them. Heimir Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Declude posted this a couple weeks back and are still working on testing the new version that resolves the issues with 8.2x http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg24792.html Darrell -- DLAnalyzer - Comprehensive reporting for Declude Junkmail and Virus. Download it today - http://www.invariantsystems.com Orillia ProNet Administration writes: Hi. I am running Imail 8.15hf2 as my mail server and Declude 1.82. I want to upgrade to Imail 8.21. any issues with that and Declude 1.82? -- Regards, Orillia ProNet Administration Orillia ProNet 22A Colborne Street West Orillia, Ontairo L3V 2Y3 705-329-3949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- 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 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 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] IMail 8.02
I just noticed that it was posted June 5. Whats the deal? 2.5 months later and no update? Bring back Scott please. This is not good enough. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Well, good to know. I spent this weekend troubleshooting this problem. Our SMTP process would blow up then the SMTP becomes unresponsive. Almost like tar pitting. I wish I had known this Friday :( I hope this is the number 1 priority for them. Heimir Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Declude posted this a couple weeks back and are still working on testing the new version that resolves the issues with 8.2x http://www.mail-archive.com/declude.junkmail@declude.com/msg24792.html Darrell -- DLAnalyzer - Comprehensive reporting for Declude Junkmail and Virus. Download it today - http://www.invariantsystems.com Orillia ProNet Administration writes: Hi. I am running Imail 8.15hf2 as my mail server and Declude 1.82. I want to upgrade to Imail 8.21. any issues with that and Declude 1.82? -- Regards, Orillia ProNet Administration Orillia ProNet 22A Colborne Street West Orillia, Ontairo L3V 2Y3 705-329-3949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] --- 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 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 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 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] Tests for only one domain
Hey, I have a customer that wants to filter on certain words. I did create the filter and it works but my question is this: Since I now have a new test in the global.cfg file, the test is ran for every email and every domain. That seems to be a waste of resources. Any way I can run this test ONLY for the domain? Also, they want to block all free mail providers like hotmail,yahoo, etc. I assume I just make another filter for that but again I will be running filters on emails that does not need to be filtered. Would it be better just to add a Imail rule to block the domains? Does the Imail rules allows this: @hotmail.com? H. --- 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] For Marcus Gufler or Reidmann
www.spamchk.com is hacked. I could not find an email address on your site to report this too. --- 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] For Marcus Gufler or Reidmann
I think it just a defacement exploiting the PHP-Nuke system. I feel kind of bad for posting it here but could not find anywhere else to post or notify them via email. H. Matt wrote: Looks like this hacker is targeting sites that make use of PHP-Nuke (a content management system). Maybe it's just a simple defacement that makes use of the tool instead of a full server hack. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: www.spamchk.com is hacked. I could not find an email address on your site to report this too. --- 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 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] fromfile filter not working
Why is this not working. I am not sure what I am missing. I did create a blacklist for email addresses per the Declude manual. dec060805.log 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 NOABUSE:10 NOPOSTMASTER:10 . Total weight = 20. 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Tests failed [weight=20]: NOABUSE=WARN[10] NOPOSTMASTER=WARN[10] NOLEGITCONTENT=WARN[0] IPNOTINMX=WARN[0] CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE[0] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 L1 Message OK 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Subject: testststst 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IP: 68.142.206.35 ID: 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Action(s) taken for [EMAIL PROTECTED] = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] global BADEMAILfromfiled:\imail\declude\bademail.txtx 1000 default.junkmail BADEMAILWARN bademail.txt [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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] fromfile filter not working
Path is correct, I did verify that several times. I used notepad to create the bademail.txt file. one email address per line. Not sure why this is not working. Thank you for your help. H. Colbeck, Andrew wrote: The test definition in your global.cfg looks fine, Heimir. The next thing to check is whether that path is really correct from the server's perspective. The next, next thing to check is that you have a blank line after that one entry in bademail.txt; it's a requirement. I'm not sure if your text editor matters, but good old NotePad will do the job just fine. If you use a *nix like editor that only puts in CR instead of CR and LF characters, I don't know if that will work. Andrew 8) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heimir Eidskrem Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 10:02 AM To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] fromfile filter not working Why is this not working. I am not sure what I am missing. I did create a blacklist for email addresses per the Declude manual. dec060805.log 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 NOABUSE:10 NOPOSTMASTER:10 . Total weight = 20. 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Tests failed [weight=20]: NOABUSE=WARN[10] NOPOSTMASTER=WARN[10] NOLEGITCONTENT=WARN[0] IPNOTINMX=WARN[0] CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE[0] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 L1 Message OK 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Subject: testststst 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IP: 68.142.206.35 ID: 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Action(s) taken for [EMAIL PROTECTED] = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] global BADEMAILfromfiled:\imail\declude\bademail.txtx 1000 default.junkmail BADEMAILWARN bademail.txt [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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 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 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] fromfile filter not working
I did post a snippet from the log file in my first email. Will turn on debug for Declude. H. Nick Hayer wrote: 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 PROTECTED], and type unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail. The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.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] fromfile filter not working
Great. It worked... Thanks.. H. Scott Fisher wrote: I checked my logs and I am catching email addresses with a fromfile. I'd suggest adding an extra blank line at the bottom of bademail.txt - Original Message - From: Heimir Eidskrem [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 12:02 PM Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] fromfile filter not working Why is this not working. I am not sure what I am missing. I did create a blacklist for email addresses per the Declude manual. dec060805.log 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 NOABUSE:10 NOPOSTMASTER:10 . Total weight = 20. 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Tests failed [weight=20]: NOABUSE=WARN[10] NOPOSTMASTER=WARN[10] NOLEGITCONTENT=WARN[0] IPNOTINMX=WARN[0] CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE[0] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 L1 Message OK 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Subject: testststst 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IP: 68.142.206.35 ID: 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Action(s) taken for [EMAIL PROTECTED] = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] 06/08/2005 11:53:08 Q226C01340101 Cumulative action(s) taken on this email = IGNORE WARN [LAST ACTION=WARN] global BADEMAILfromfiled:\imail\declude\bademail.txtx 1000 default.junkmail BADEMAILWARN bademail.txt [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 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 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 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] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6
We are crashing like crazy today, quemanager status goes to stop pending. Can not restart it, have to restart the server. Imail 8.15 with fix Declude 1.81 Fprot 3.16b Windows 2003 Server Standard with Sp1. Suggestions please cott_powner wrote: Sorry about not getting back to anyone some malcontent set up a winmx server in my network! Anyway the bottom line right now is: Declude 1.81 - No problems for about a million years Declude 2.0.6 - Imail crashes for two days Reinstalled Declude 1.81 - No crashes for 1 day Installed SP1 with Declude 1.81 - No crashes for day but it seems to run slower Any thoughts we are going to let SP1 run through the night. If it still seems slow to access mail we will remove SP1 in the A.M. Thanks, Scott Powner -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Colbeck, Andrew *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:19 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 Nothing about the service that SP1 installs, but I did I find multiple pages on Microsoft's site about Application and User Experience, which seems to be their quality and regresssion testing. They indicate that 3rd party vendors should follow: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/appcompatibility/default.mspx and http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/partners/isvs/appsupp.mspx this application testing in order to verify that their applications work correctly with their OS. There is also a page that lists 120-plus applications that this Application and User Experience team tested with Windows Server 2003 SP1, and produced results (including their own software): http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896367 Andrew 8) -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Matt *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:34 AM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 I don't know if this is of any help here, but two new SP1 features that I don't understand and I fear to some extent are the Application Experience Lookup Service and Data Execution Prevention (DEP). It seems like both might represent overhead to things like Declude which are called from a command line along with all of the applications that it calls, and it might not be wise to run them in such an environment. I haven't tried turning them off yet, but I was just starting the process of researching them. The Application Experience Lookup Service can be turned off in Services, and Data Execution Prevention (DEP) is controlled by the boot.ini. I can't find hardly any information on the Application Experience Lookup Service, but Data Execution Prevention (DEP) has a KB article about it: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352 There is also another level of DCOM security, and this may or may not cause issues with .NET stuff. I don't know. I haven't tried upping from Declude 1.82 yet as I wanted to apply SP1 and make sure that it was workable before introducing something else that was new to the environment. Matt Erik wrote: I'll add our point too. We also are crashing with 2.0.6 (also SP1 installed). We've put back 1.82 into production. No issues. -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *scott_powner *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 4:35 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com mailto:Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 We just put SP1 on this morning but have not had a crash since we went back to 1.81 on Declude. Thanks, Scott -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Gufler Markus *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:31 AM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com mailto:Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 I haven't upgraded jet to v2 but can see the same problems with imail since installed win2003 SP1 Haven't seen any crash since removing SP1 but this is not 100% sure at the moment. I will report it later this week. Markus *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *scott_powner *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 1:48 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com mailto:Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6
Thank you for the reply. Running 1.82 actually. Imail monitor is off. Its a dual Xeon 3.0GHz with 2GB Ram. Load is pretty low. About a million emails a month. No evidence of extra load. I did turn off the auto restart. Lets see if that makes a change or not... Thanks, Matt wrote: Turn off the IMail Monitor service and see if things don't become more stable. There have been suggestions that it will try to restart a service that is only overwhelmed but not crashed, and the restarting process can then actually cause it to crash. Windows 2003 services have their own recovery capabilities that should be more stable. I have seen this happen before. It is quite possible that some added load might be pushing your server to the limit, or maybe a piece of content that IMail doesn't like seeing and Declude isn't filtering. I've heard of that happening in the past also. Turn on Auto-deny possible hack attempts in IMail's SMTP Security if that isn't already on as this might also be the result of an overflow condition during the SMTP session. Declude 1.81 has a big flaw in it with the SPAMHEADERS test and you should upgrade to at least 1.82. This shouldn't explain the instability. You should give some more detail about your server, especially conditions related to load if this continues. There are many of us running 1.82 without issues, and with SP1 my own server seems stable and I have a good deal of volume going through it. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: We are crashing like crazy today, quemanager status goes to stop pending. Can not restart it, have to restart the server. Imail 8.15 with fix Declude 1.81 Fprot 3.16b Windows 2003 Server Standard with Sp1. Suggestions please cott_powner wrote: Sorry about not getting back to anyone some malcontent set up a winmx server in my network! Anyway the bottom line right now is: Declude 1.81 - No problems for about a million years Declude 2.0.6 - Imail crashes for two days Reinstalled Declude 1.81 - No crashes for 1 day Installed SP1 with Declude 1.81 - No crashes for day but it seems to run slower Any thoughts we are going to let SP1 run through the night. If it still seems slow to access mail we will remove SP1 in the A.M. Thanks, Scott Powner -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Colbeck, Andrew *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:19 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 Nothing about the service that SP1 installs, but I did I find multiple pages on Microsoft's site about Application and User Experience, which seems to be their quality and regresssion testing. They indicate that 3rd party vendors should follow: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/appcompatibility/default.mspx and http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/partners/isvs/appsupp.mspx this application testing in order to verify that their applications work correctly with their OS. There is also a page that lists 120-plus applications that this Application and User Experience team tested with Windows Server 2003 SP1, and produced results (including their own software): http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896367 Andrew 8) -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Matt *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:34 AM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 I don't know if this is of any help here, but two new SP1 features that I don't understand and I fear to some extent are the Application Experience Lookup Service and Data Execution Prevention (DEP). It seems like both might represent overhead to things like Declude which are called from a command line along with all of the applications that it calls, and it might not be wise to run them in such an environment. I haven't tried turning them off yet, but I was just starting the process of researching them. The Application Experience Lookup Service can be turned off in Services, and Data Execution Prevention (DEP) is controlled by the boot.ini. I can't find hardly any information on the Application Experience Lookup Service, but Data Execution Prevention (DEP) has a KB article about it: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352 There is also another level of DCOM security, and this may or may not cause issues with .NET stuff. I don't know. I haven't tried upping from Declude 1.82 yet as I wanted to apply SP1 and make sure that it was workable before introducing something else that was new to the environment. Matt Erik wrote: I'll add our point too. We also are crashing with 2.0.6 (also SP1 installed). We've put back 1.82 into production. No issues. -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6
Just a few minutes ago the Que manager stopped. I did restart it fine this time. What could this be? H. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Thank you for the reply. Running 1.82 actually. Imail monitor is off. Its a dual Xeon 3.0GHz with 2GB Ram. Load is pretty low. About a million emails a month. No evidence of extra load. I did turn off the auto restart. Lets see if that makes a change or not... Thanks, Matt wrote: Turn off the IMail Monitor service and see if things don't become more stable. There have been suggestions that it will try to restart a service that is only overwhelmed but not crashed, and the restarting process can then actually cause it to crash. Windows 2003 services have their own recovery capabilities that should be more stable. I have seen this happen before. It is quite possible that some added load might be pushing your server to the limit, or maybe a piece of content that IMail doesn't like seeing and Declude isn't filtering. I've heard of that happening in the past also. Turn on Auto-deny possible hack attempts in IMail's SMTP Security if that isn't already on as this might also be the result of an overflow condition during the SMTP session. Declude 1.81 has a big flaw in it with the SPAMHEADERS test and you should upgrade to at least 1.82. This shouldn't explain the instability. You should give some more detail about your server, especially conditions related to load if this continues. There are many of us running 1.82 without issues, and with SP1 my own server seems stable and I have a good deal of volume going through it. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: We are crashing like crazy today, quemanager status goes to stop pending. Can not restart it, have to restart the server. Imail 8.15 with fix Declude 1.81 Fprot 3.16b Windows 2003 Server Standard with Sp1. Suggestions please cott_powner wrote: Sorry about not getting back to anyone some malcontent set up a winmx server in my network! Anyway the bottom line right now is: Declude 1.81 - No problems for about a million years Declude 2.0.6 - Imail crashes for two days Reinstalled Declude 1.81 - No crashes for 1 day Installed SP1 with Declude 1.81 - No crashes for day but it seems to run slower Any thoughts we are going to let SP1 run through the night. If it still seems slow to access mail we will remove SP1 in the A.M. Thanks, Scott Powner -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Colbeck, Andrew *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:19 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 Nothing about the service that SP1 installs, but I did I find multiple pages on Microsoft's site about Application and User Experience, which seems to be their quality and regresssion testing. They indicate that 3rd party vendors should follow: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/appcompatibility/default.mspx and http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/partners/isvs/appsupp.mspx this application testing in order to verify that their applications work correctly with their OS. There is also a page that lists 120-plus applications that this Application and User Experience team tested with Windows Server 2003 SP1, and produced results (including their own software): http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896367 Andrew 8) -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Matt *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:34 AM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 I don't know if this is of any help here, but two new SP1 features that I don't understand and I fear to some extent are the Application Experience Lookup Service and Data Execution Prevention (DEP). It seems like both might represent overhead to things like Declude which are called from a command line along with all of the applications that it calls, and it might not be wise to run them in such an environment. I haven't tried turning them off yet, but I was just starting the process of researching them. The Application Experience Lookup Service can be turned off in Services, and Data Execution Prevention (DEP) is controlled by the boot.ini. I can't find hardly any information on the Application Experience Lookup Service, but Data Execution Prevention (DEP) has a KB article about it: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/875352 There is also another level of DCOM security, and this may or may not cause issues with .NET stuff. I don't know. I haven't tried upping from Declude 1.82 yet as I wanted to apply SP1 and make sure that it was workable before introducing something else that was new to the environment. Matt Erik wrote: I'll add our point too. We also are crashing with 2.0.6 (also SP1 installed). We've put back 1.82 into production. No issues
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes
Matt, Auto-deny possible hack attempts has been turned on. I will do a search. My service contract is valid but I really have not had much luck using Ipswitch support in the past H. Matt wrote: I've seen a lot of posts about this over the years on the IMail list. It is likely an IMail issue. The suggestion to turn on Auto-deny possible hack attempts in IMail's SMTP Security is one possible fix, and you didn't indicate anything in regard to that suggestion. You might try searching the archives for the IMail list on mail-archive.org for what others have experienced and potentially the fixes. If you have a support agreement with Ipswitch, you might also try that route as they should be familiar with the condition. It seems hit or miss as to who experiences it, but I can't recall ever seeing Queue Manager crash on my box, and the only IMail related crash was POP3 which happened twice after migrating to Windows 2003, but I think that McAfee was the culprit that caused the instability. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Just a few minutes ago the Que manager stopped. I did restart it fine this time. What could this be? H. Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Thank you for the reply. Running 1.82 actually. Imail monitor is off. Its a dual Xeon 3.0GHz with 2GB Ram. Load is pretty low. About a million emails a month. No evidence of extra load. I did turn off the auto restart. Lets see if that makes a change or not... Thanks, Matt wrote: Turn off the IMail Monitor service and see if things don't become more stable. There have been suggestions that it will try to restart a service that is only overwhelmed but not crashed, and the restarting process can then actually cause it to crash. Windows 2003 services have their own recovery capabilities that should be more stable. I have seen this happen before. It is quite possible that some added load might be pushing your server to the limit, or maybe a piece of content that IMail doesn't like seeing and Declude isn't filtering. I've heard of that happening in the past also. Turn on Auto-deny possible hack attempts in IMail's SMTP Security if that isn't already on as this might also be the result of an overflow condition during the SMTP session. Declude 1.81 has a big flaw in it with the SPAMHEADERS test and you should upgrade to at least 1.82. This shouldn't explain the instability. You should give some more detail about your server, especially conditions related to load if this continues. There are many of us running 1.82 without issues, and with SP1 my own server seems stable and I have a good deal of volume going through it. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: We are crashing like crazy today, quemanager status goes to stop pending. Can not restart it, have to restart the server. Imail 8.15 with fix Declude 1.81 Fprot 3.16b Windows 2003 Server Standard with Sp1. Suggestions please cott_powner wrote: Sorry about not getting back to anyone some malcontent set up a winmx server in my network! Anyway the bottom line right now is: Declude 1.81 - No problems for about a million years Declude 2.0.6 - Imail crashes for two days Reinstalled Declude 1.81 - No crashes for 1 day Installed SP1 with Declude 1.81 - No crashes for day but it seems to run slower Any thoughts we are going to let SP1 run through the night. If it still seems slow to access mail we will remove SP1 in the A.M. Thanks, Scott Powner -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Colbeck, Andrew *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:19 PM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 Nothing about the service that SP1 installs, but I did I find multiple pages on Microsoft's site about Application and User Experience, which seems to be their quality and regresssion testing. They indicate that 3rd party vendors should follow: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/appcompatibility/default.mspx and http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/partners/isvs/appsupp.mspx this application testing in order to verify that their applications work correctly with their OS. There is also a page that lists 120-plus applications that this Application and User Experience team tested with Windows Server 2003 SP1, and produced results (including their own software): http://support.microsoft.com/kb/896367 Andrew 8) -Original Message- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Matt *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2005 8:34 AM *To:* Declude.JunkMail@declude.com *Subject:* Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail crashes after declude 2.0.6 I don't know if this is of any help here, but two new SP1 features that I don't understand and I fear to some extent are the Application Experience Lookup Service and Data Execution Prevention (DEP). It seems like both might represent overhead to things like Declude which are called from
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Any word on the 2.06 release?
R. Scott Perry wrote: Agreed on Scott leaving. And what's up with that anyway? There was news article I noticed on their site a few weeks ago stating something about Scott leaving because he wanted to spend more time working for the Red Cross? Correct. :) The new article was http://www.declude.com/Articles.asp?ID=150, and it was short and sweet. Basically, I needed a break. I had been putting so much time into Declude over the past close to 5 years that I didn't have time to do some of the things that I wanted to, such as volunteering at the Red Cross. Before I started Declude, I was a very active volunteer on their local Disaster Action Team, responding to hundreds of local disasters (typically house fires, but occasionally other things such as floods, hazardous materials incidents, even a hostage situation once). It was very rewarding, and while I've managed to go to their monthly meetings over these years, I haven't had a chance to go to the local disasters, and I have really missed it. -Scott --- Scott, You are a good man for your volunteer work. Good job... Heimir --- [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 problems after imail upgrade.
Here is 2 messages that did fail weight350 and did get saved in the weight350 directory. This is working correctly, expect there are no declude headers for the messages. Below each message is the lines from the declude log file: Received: from z-point.de [24.202.78.132] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AA1018301E8; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:11:44 -0600 Received: from 150.238.113.147 by smtp.tecban.com.br; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:04:45 + Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Cristina Pickett [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: New product! Cialis soft tabs. Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 18:04:33 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=7.00 required=5.00 tests=SUBJECT_DRUG_GAP_C:2.90 tests=BAYES_99:4.10 12/16/2004 15:11:50 Qfa10018301e85c11 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IP: 24.202.78.132 ID: 12/16/2004 15:11:50 Qfa10018301e85c11 Tests failed [weight=435]: DSBL=WARN SPAMCOP=WARN FIVETENSRC=WARN CBL=WARN SORBS-DUL=WARN SPAMDOMAINS=WARN NOLEGITCONTENT=WARN IPNOTINMX=WARN CMDSPACE=WARN EFFILTER=WARN EFFILTER5-9=WARN COUNTRYFILTER=WARN SNIFFER=WARN WEIGHT75=WARN WEIGHT100=HOLD WEIGHT350=COPYFILE CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE 12/16/2004 15:11:50 Qfa10018301e85c11 Last action = HOLD. Received: from 64.95.220.80 [61.107.153.188] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A9F42CB0218; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:11:16 -0600 Received: from mn68.jxg.gpvig.com ([134.120.6.47]) by mc12-f20.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.08347); Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:26:24 +0200 Received: from mb24.dko.bkvok.com ([224.224.232.122])by mx21.scy.tjdwr.com (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id i2E5XSGm029877for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 17:27:24 -0400 X-Message-Info: WR29Th3to0Xu9wfR/8vk2Ct7sgB Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 19:23:24 -0200 Subject: Get Cable FOR NOTHING Wed, 15 Dec 2004 13:29:24 -0800 From: Jean Mclaughlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--080875099130426541 X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=14.40 required=5.00 tests=MIME_BOUND_DD_DIGITS:3.20 tests=RCVD_FAKE_IP_224:3.10 tests=X_MESSAGE_INFO:3.30 tests=BAYES_90:3.00 tests=MIME_MISSING_BOUNDARY:1.80 12/16/2004 15:11:22 Qf9f302cb02185bdd From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] IP: 61.107.153.188 ID: i2E5XSGm029877for 12/16/2004 15:11:22 Qf9f302cb02185bdd Tests failed [weight=683]: SPAMCOP=WARN FIVETENSRC=WARN CBL=WARN SORBS-DUL=WARN MAILPOLICE-BULK=WARN BHOLE-KOREA=WARN SUBJECTSPACES7=WARN NOLEGITCONTENT=WARN BADHEADERS=WARN IPNOTINMX=WARN REVDNS=WARN ROUTING=WARN SPAMHEADERS=WARN CMDSPACE=WARN EFFILTER=WARN EFFILTER10-14=WARN COUNTRYFILTER=WARN SNIFFER=WARN WEIGHT75=WARN WEIGHT100=HOLD WEIGHT350=COPYFILE CATCHALLMAILS=IGNORE 12/16/2004 15:11:22 Qf9f302cb02185bdd Last action = HOLD. The message below came to my inbox and has no declude headers and I can not find the sender [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the declude log file. Received: from dsl47-172.pool.bitel.net [212.100.47.172] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AB734400DA; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:30:11 -0600 Received: from affable.roliosaa.com ([24.122.72.118]) by shay.beinjgh.com (InterMail vK.4.04.00.03 635-306-403-20030852 license 9nm547ll4323r7kq3y1ztk9766t8kjo6) with SMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:25:21 +0100 Received: from www.roliosaa.com (231.231.144.0) by affable.roliosaa.com (RS ver 1.0.92vs) with SMTP id 3-26c103487040 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:22:21 +0300 (EDT) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:27:21 -0700 From: Demetrius Nunez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cheao Online Pharmacy::: Sender: Demetrius Nunez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=7.20 required=5.00 tests=BAYES_99:4.10 tests=ONLINE_PHARMACY:3.10 R. Scott Perry wrote: I did recive this spam in my inbox this morning. As you can see it does not have any declude info and no Imail spam info either. What do the IMail and Declude log files show for the E-mail?What version of IMail are you running? What version of Declude are you running? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers since 2000. Declude Virus: Ultra reliable virus detection and the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you've been missing: Ask
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] declude problems after imail upgrade.
I did recive this spam in my inbox this morning. As you can see it does not have any declude info and no Imail spam info either. Received: from 64.95.220.80 [217.96.6.120] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AB6D3008E; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:30:05 -0600 Received: from beforehand.purpossz.com ([59.208.20.202]) by esophagi.purpossz.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.07 (built Aug 27 2004)) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:22:15 -0400 (IST) Received: from bobble.disppopp.com ([32.192.160.12]) by beforehand.purpossz.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.06 (built Aug 27 2004)) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ORCPT [EMAIL PROTECTED]); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 03:24:15 -0300 (IST) Received: from sycophant.disppopp.com ([130.50.0.160]) by bobble.disppopp.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.2951.707); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:25:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:29:15 +0300 From: Josefa Yu [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ,Best Online Pharmacy Sender: Josefa Yu [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: U X-UIDL: 397200687 This one came in a few hours later and you see the Declude headers: Received: from 3D1 [12.96.0.66] by 3dnetsolutions.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.14) id A46A3EE0122; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 06:49:46 -0600 From: David Brauner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Stone Store Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 06:45:45 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary==_NextPart_000_0006_01C4E33A.E063C620 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: AcTjbSjjgbGMUjKmTO+xUhD2Mk6M8g== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [12.96.0.66] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: Whitelisted [0] X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from fw01.aumgt.com ([12.96.0.66]). X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: U X-UIDL: 397200690 Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Imail's anti spam is turned off. Atleast I think it is. I have nothing in the DNS list and do not have the antispam option under the domains. Here is another header and it does not show the Imail spam header: Note that is only show weight75 but with a score of 540 Received: from FIREWALL [200.228.80.2] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AD04801DC; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:36:52 -0600 Received: from dns0.keromail.com ([132.146.16.88]) by 1swk-wkl15.200.228.80.2 with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.3243.5389); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:30:07 -0100 Reply-To: Your wife sleeps around man [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Your wife sleeps around man [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MILF looking for fun Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:27:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--9567293821psrq3033 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-RBL-Warning: DSBL: http://dsbl.org/listing?200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCOP: Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: NJABLPROXIES: open proxy -- 1096166403 X-RBL-Warning: FIVETENSRC: miscellaneous address blocks that have sent spam here X-RBL-Warning: CBL: Blocked - see http://cbl.abuseat.org/lookup.cgi?ip=200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: BHOLE-BRAZIL: Brazil blocked by brazil.blackholes.us X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to legitimate E-mail detected. X-RBL-Warning: HELOBOGUS: Domain FIREWALL has no MX or A records [0301]. X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: X-RBL-Warning: REVDNS: This E-mail was sent from a MUA/MTA 200.228.80.2 with no reverse DNS entry. X-RBL-Warning: ROUTING: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [630f]. X-RBL-Warning: SPAMHEADERS: This E-mail has headers consistent with spam [630f]. X-RBL-Warning: CMDSPACE: Space found in RCPT TO: command. X-RBL-Warning: COUNTRYFILTER: Message failed COUNTRYFILTER test (line 29, weight 20) X-RBL-Warning: SNIFFER: Message failed SNIFFER: 54. X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT75: Weight of 540 reaches or exceeds the limit of 75. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [200.228.80.2] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: DSBL, SPAMCOP, NJABLPROXIES, FIVETENSRC, CBL, BHOLE-BRAZIL, NOLEGITCONTENT, HELOBOGUS, IPNOTINMX, REVDNS, ROUTING, SPAMHEADERS, CMDSPACE, COUNTRYFILTER, SNIFFER, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, WEIGHT350, CATCHALLMAILS [540] X-Country-Chain: 'EU' [corrupt RIPE data]-BRAZIL-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from [No Reverse DNS] ([200.228.80.2]). Matt wrote: From the attached issue #2 headers I saw the following that suggests the issue: X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS: (fe1a000200328ac4, 0.9892) You need to make sure that IMail's spam stuff is turned off. It seems like
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] declude problems after imail upgrade.
Scott, This is from the my first email regarding this: Hello there, I did an upgrade to 8.14 tonight and im seeing a few things thats are different. Tech info: Imail 8.14 Declude 1.81 (Junkmail/virus Pro) Server 2.6Ghz Xeon/1GB Ram I am capturing spam so I know Declude is working. Issue 1. I hold on weigth100 and on weight350 I do a copyfile d:\imail\spool\spam\weight350. I see several emails in the normal hold directory with a weight higher then 350 that should have been saved in the weight350 directory Also the emails in the weight350 directory does not have ANY declude headers? Weigth350 header: eceived: from 64.95.220.80 [211.221.13.162] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A02C2900C6; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:25:32 -0600 Received: from dotcool.com ([142.67.185.186]) by infinite.audioseek.com (InterMail vK.4.04.00.00 583-722-824 license 9jh638vy1934o4xw8h8ozi6348a0igq4) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:08:11 +0200 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:09:11 +0200 From: Jodi Luna [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: our discussion on december 21th To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Weight100 Header Received: from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com [209.216.105.34] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A0519B0146; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:34:25 -0600 From: Family Pictures [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Something the whole family can enjoy...a free Panasonic Camcorder To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:33:36 EST Message-ID: q7AA1,[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: 3.2.2-23 [Dec 14 2004, 19:36:15] Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; class-id=1:311TXBIMpInmBEs1BI131sYMp1:1787079 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=8.00 required=5.00 tests=BAYES_80:2.20 tests=HTTP_WITH_EMAIL_IN_URL:1.60 tests=NAI_BAD_URI:4.20 X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCOP: Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?209.216.105.34; X-RBL-Warning: SBL: http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL18575; X-RBL-Warning: AHBL: 1100493921 bruns - Spam Source - 209.216.105.0/24 - demandconnection.com, SubscriberBASE, animateddeliverye.com X-RBL-Warning: FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT: added 2003-05-30; spam support - hosting admanmail, emailbucks X-RBL-Warning: MAILPOLICE-BULK: This E-mail came from stderr.supplyleadb.com, a potential spam source listed in MAILPOLICE-BULK. X-RBL-Warning: SUBJECTSPACES7: Subject with at least 7 spaces found. X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to legitimate E-mail detected. X-RBL-Warning: BADHEADERS: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [8008000e]. X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER: Message failed EFFILTER test (line 1, weight 0) X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER5-9: Message failed EFFILTER5-9 test (line 4, weight 40) X-RBL-Warning: GIBBERISH: Message failed GIBBERISH test (line 400, weight 60) (weight capped at 60) X-RBL-Warning: SNIFFER: Message failed SNIFFER: 57. X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT75: Weight of 438 reaches or exceeds the limit of 75. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.216.105.34] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, SBL, AHBL, FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT, MAILPOLICE-BULK, SUBJECTSPACES7, NOLEGITCONTENT, BADHEADERS, IPNOTINMX, EFFILTER, EFFILTER5-9, GIBBERISH, SNIFFER, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, WEIGHT350, CATCHALLMAILS [438] X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com ([209.216.105.34]). Issue 2. I did recive an email in my inbox with no Declude headers. Any idea why? Received: from host44.200-45-196.telecom.net.ar [200.45.196.44] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AE1E20032; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:16:46 -0600 Received: from .striker.ottawa.on.ca ([101.154.58.194] helo=mail.nitros5.org) by .striker.ottawa.on.ca with esmtp ( 3.35 #1 ()) id 450nlc-0078MM-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:07:25 -0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:13:25 +0200 From: Deena Sumner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: You Need This Heimir X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS: (fe1a000200328ac4, 0.9892) X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: R X-UIDL: 397200679 I did search the declude log file for [EMAIL PROTECTED] but could not find anything.. R. Scott Perry wrote: I did recive this spam in my inbox this morning. As you can see it does not have any declude info and no Imail spam info either. What do the IMail and Declude log files show for the E-mail?What version of IMail are you running? What version of Declude are you running? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] declude problems after imail upgrade.
Matt, Don't think so since im still seeing this. Also, I notice that the my weight350 test is not triggered. I only see the weight75 test with 846 points for example and not the other ones. So far I have not found any messages with declude headers in my weight350 directory. H Matt wrote: Stopping and starting IMail's SMTP and Queue Manager services will cause IMail to pass messages for a couple seconds without sending them to external programs (Declude). This will happen mostly when you perform a restart on your Windows server. To prevent this, you must stop the IMail SMTP service before the restart. This will also occur when you stop and restart both the SMTP and Queue Manager services in a certain order and/or rapid succession (I never nailed that one down). Could this be your issue, or is this a continual issue? Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Hello there, I did an upgrade to 8.14 tonight and im seeing a few things thats are different. Tech info: Imail 8.14 Declude 1.81 (Junkmail/virus Pro) Server 2.6Ghz Xeon/1GB Ram I am capturing spam so I know Declude is working. Issue 1. I hold on weigth100 and on weight350 I do a copyfile d:\imail\spool\spam\weight350. I see several emails in the normal hold directory with a weight higher then 350 that should have been saved in the weight350 directory Also the emails in the weight350 directory does not have ANY declude headers? Weigth350 header: eceived: from 64.95.220.80 [211.221.13.162] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A02C2900C6; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:25:32 -0600 Received: from dotcool.com ([142.67.185.186]) by infinite.audioseek.com (InterMail vK.4.04.00.00 583-722-824 license 9jh638vy1934o4xw8h8ozi6348a0igq4) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:08:11 +0200 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:09:11 +0200 From: Jodi Luna [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: our discussion on december 21th To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Weight100 Header Received: from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com [209.216.105.34] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A0519B0146; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:34:25 -0600 From: Family Pictures [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Something the whole family can enjoy...a free Panasonic Camcorder To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:33:36 EST Message-ID: q7AA1,[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: 3.2.2-23 [Dec 14 2004, 19:36:15] Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; class-id=1:311TXBIMpInmBEs1BI131sYMp1:1787079 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=8.00 required=5.00 tests=BAYES_80:2.20 tests=HTTP_WITH_EMAIL_IN_URL:1.60 tests=NAI_BAD_URI:4.20 X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCOP: Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?209.216.105.34; X-RBL-Warning: SBL: http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL18575; X-RBL-Warning: AHBL: 1100493921 bruns - Spam Source - 209.216.105.0/24 - demandconnection.com, SubscriberBASE, animateddeliverye.com X-RBL-Warning: FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT: added 2003-05-30; spam support - hosting admanmail, emailbucks X-RBL-Warning: MAILPOLICE-BULK: This E-mail came from stderr.supplyleadb.com, a potential spam source listed in MAILPOLICE-BULK. X-RBL-Warning: SUBJECTSPACES7: Subject with at least 7 spaces found. X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to legitimate E-mail detected. X-RBL-Warning: BADHEADERS: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [8008000e]. X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER: Message failed EFFILTER test (line 1, weight 0) X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER5-9: Message failed EFFILTER5-9 test (line 4, weight 40) X-RBL-Warning: GIBBERISH: Message failed GIBBERISH test (line 400, weight 60) (weight capped at 60) X-RBL-Warning: SNIFFER: Message failed SNIFFER: 57. X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT75: Weight of 438 reaches or exceeds the limit of 75. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.216.105.34] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, SBL, AHBL, FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT, MAILPOLICE-BULK, SUBJECTSPACES7, NOLEGITCONTENT, BADHEADERS, IPNOTINMX, EFFILTER, EFFILTER5-9, GIBBERISH, SNIFFER, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, WEIGHT350, CATCHALLMAILS [438] X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com ([209.216.105.34]). Issue 2. I did recive an email in my inbox with no Declude headers. Any idea why? Received: from host44.200-45-196.telecom.net.ar [200.45.196.44] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AE1E20032; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:16:46 -0600 Received: from .striker.ottawa.on.ca ([101.154.58.194] helo=mail.nitros5.org) by .striker.ottawa.on.ca with esmtp ( 3.35 #1 ()) id 450nlc-0078MM-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:07:25 -0200
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] declude problems after imail upgrade.
Imail's anti spam is turned off. Atleast I think it is. I have nothing in the DNS list and do not have the antispam option under the domains. Here is another header and it does not show the Imail spam header: Note that is only show weight75 but with a score of 540 Received: from FIREWALL [200.228.80.2] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AD04801DC; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:36:52 -0600 Received: from dns0.keromail.com ([132.146.16.88]) by 1swk-wkl15.200.228.80.2 with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.3243.5389); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 05:30:07 -0100 Reply-To: Your wife sleeps around man [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Your wife sleeps around man [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: MILF looking for fun Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 02:27:07 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--9567293821psrq3033 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-RBL-Warning: DSBL: http://dsbl.org/listing?200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCOP: Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: NJABLPROXIES: open proxy -- 1096166403 X-RBL-Warning: FIVETENSRC: miscellaneous address blocks that have sent spam here X-RBL-Warning: CBL: Blocked - see http://cbl.abuseat.org/lookup.cgi?ip=200.228.80.2; X-RBL-Warning: BHOLE-BRAZIL: Brazil blocked by brazil.blackholes.us X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to legitimate E-mail detected. X-RBL-Warning: HELOBOGUS: Domain FIREWALL has no MX or A records [0301]. X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: X-RBL-Warning: REVDNS: This E-mail was sent from a MUA/MTA 200.228.80.2 with no reverse DNS entry. X-RBL-Warning: ROUTING: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [630f]. X-RBL-Warning: SPAMHEADERS: This E-mail has headers consistent with spam [630f]. X-RBL-Warning: CMDSPACE: Space found in RCPT TO: command. X-RBL-Warning: COUNTRYFILTER: Message failed COUNTRYFILTER test (line 29, weight 20) X-RBL-Warning: SNIFFER: Message failed SNIFFER: 54. X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT75: Weight of 540 reaches or exceeds the limit of 75. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [200.228.80.2] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: DSBL, SPAMCOP, NJABLPROXIES, FIVETENSRC, CBL, BHOLE-BRAZIL, NOLEGITCONTENT, HELOBOGUS, IPNOTINMX, REVDNS, ROUTING, SPAMHEADERS, CMDSPACE, COUNTRYFILTER, SNIFFER, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, WEIGHT350, CATCHALLMAILS [540] X-Country-Chain: 'EU' [corrupt RIPE data]-BRAZIL-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from [No Reverse DNS] ([200.228.80.2]). Matt wrote: From the attached issue #2 headers I saw the following that suggests the issue: X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS: (fe1a000200328ac4, 0.9892) You need to make sure that IMail's spam stuff is turned off. It seems like IMail might be screwing this up for Declude. I am guessing that this isn't intended and could be the cause of at least issue #2. Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Matt, Don't think so since im still seeing this. Also, I notice that the my weight350 test is not triggered. I only see the weight75 test with 846 points for example and not the other ones. So far I have not found any messages with declude headers in my weight350 directory. H Matt wrote: Stopping and starting IMail's SMTP and Queue Manager services will cause IMail to pass messages for a couple seconds without sending them to external programs (Declude). This will happen mostly when you perform a restart on your Windows server. To prevent this, you must stop the IMail SMTP service before the restart. This will also occur when you stop and restart both the SMTP and Queue Manager services in a certain order and/or rapid succession (I never nailed that one down). Could this be your issue, or is this a continual issue? Matt Heimir Eidskrem wrote: Hello there, I did an upgrade to 8.14 tonight and im seeing a few things thats are different. Tech info: Imail 8.14 Declude 1.81 (Junkmail/virus Pro) Server 2.6Ghz Xeon/1GB Ram I am capturing spam so I know Declude is working. Issue 1. I hold on weigth100 and on weight350 I do a copyfile d:\imail\spool\spam\weight350. I see several emails in the normal hold directory with a weight higher then 350 that should have been saved in the weight350 directory Also the emails in the weight350 directory does not have ANY declude headers? Weigth350 header: eceived: from 64.95.220.80 [211.221.13.162] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A02C2900C6; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:25:32 -0600 Received: from dotcool.com ([142.67.185.186]) by infinite.audioseek.com (InterMail vK.4.04.00.00 583-722-824 license 9jh638vy1934o4xw8h8ozi6348a0igq4) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:08:11 +0200 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:09:11 +0200 From: Jodi Luna [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: our discussion on december 21th To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0
[Declude.JunkMail] declude problems after imail upgrade.
Hello there, I did an upgrade to 8.14 tonight and im seeing a few things thats are different. Tech info: Imail 8.14 Declude 1.81 (Junkmail/virus Pro) Server 2.6Ghz Xeon/1GB Ram I am capturing spam so I know Declude is working. Issue 1. I hold on weigth100 and on weight350 I do a copyfile d:\imail\spool\spam\weight350. I see several emails in the normal hold directory with a weight higher then 350 that should have been saved in the weight350 directory Also the emails in the weight350 directory does not have ANY declude headers? Weigth350 header: eceived: from 64.95.220.80 [211.221.13.162] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A02C2900C6; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:25:32 -0600 Received: from dotcool.com ([142.67.185.186]) by infinite.audioseek.com (InterMail vK.4.04.00.00 583-722-824 license 9jh638vy1934o4xw8h8ozi6348a0igq4) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:08:11 +0200 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:09:11 +0200 From: Jodi Luna [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: our discussion on december 21th To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Weight100 Header Received: from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com [209.216.105.34] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id A0519B0146; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:34:25 -0600 From: Family Pictures [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Something the whole family can enjoy...a free Panasonic Camcorder To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:33:36 EST Message-ID: q7AA1,[EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailer: 3.2.2-23 [Dec 14 2004, 19:36:15] Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; class-id=1:311TXBIMpInmBEs1BI131sYMp1:1787079 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: Possible SPAM, hits=8.00 required=5.00 tests=BAYES_80:2.20 tests=HTTP_WITH_EMAIL_IN_URL:1.60 tests=NAI_BAD_URI:4.20 X-RBL-Warning: SPAMCOP: Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?209.216.105.34; X-RBL-Warning: SBL: http://www.spamhaus.org/SBL/sbl.lasso?query=SBL18575; X-RBL-Warning: AHBL: 1100493921 bruns - Spam Source - 209.216.105.0/24 - demandconnection.com, SubscriberBASE, animateddeliverye.com X-RBL-Warning: FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT: added 2003-05-30; spam support - hosting admanmail, emailbucks X-RBL-Warning: MAILPOLICE-BULK: This E-mail came from stderr.supplyleadb.com, a potential spam source listed in MAILPOLICE-BULK. X-RBL-Warning: SUBJECTSPACES7: Subject with at least 7 spaces found. X-RBL-Warning: NOLEGITCONTENT: No content unique to legitimate E-mail detected. X-RBL-Warning: BADHEADERS: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [8008000e]. X-RBL-Warning: IPNOTINMX: X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER: Message failed EFFILTER test (line 1, weight 0) X-RBL-Warning: EFFILTER5-9: Message failed EFFILTER5-9 test (line 4, weight 40) X-RBL-Warning: GIBBERISH: Message failed GIBBERISH test (line 400, weight 60) (weight capped at 60) X-RBL-Warning: SNIFFER: Message failed SNIFFER: 57. X-RBL-Warning: WEIGHT75: Weight of 438 reaches or exceeds the limit of 75. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [209.216.105.34] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: SPAMCOP, SBL, AHBL, FIVETEN-SPAMSUPPORT, MAILPOLICE-BULK, SUBJECTSPACES7, NOLEGITCONTENT, BADHEADERS, IPNOTINMX, EFFILTER, EFFILTER5-9, GIBBERISH, SNIFFER, WEIGHT75, WEIGHT100, WEIGHT350, CATCHALLMAILS [438] X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES-destination X-Note: This E-mail was sent from outmail-01.supplyleadb.com ([209.216.105.34]). Issue 2. I did recive an email in my inbox with no Declude headers. Any idea why? Received: from host44.200-45-196.telecom.net.ar [200.45.196.44] by deepspace.i360.net (SMTPD32-8.14) id AE1E20032; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:16:46 -0600 Received: from .striker.ottawa.on.ca ([101.154.58.194] helo=mail.nitros5.org) by .striker.ottawa.on.ca with esmtp ( 3.35 #1 ()) id 450nlc-0078MM-00 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:07:25 -0200 Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:13:25 +0200 From: Deena Sumner [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: You Need This Heimir X-IMAIL-SPAM-STATISTICS: (fe1a000200328ac4, 0.9892) X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Status: R X-UIDL: 397200679 I did search the declude log file for [EMAIL PROTECTED] but could not find anything.. Thanks, Heimir --- [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] Unknown virus
Customer is getting virus notifications but the virus is listed as unknown. Is this a known issue and how do I turn of notification for unknown virus. He is clean. H. Please, DO NOT respond to this e-mail. This is an automated e-mail messagesent to alert you that you attempted to send a virus infected e-mailmessage.Fortunately, no harm is done. i360 Inc.'s advanced virus detection softwaredetected the virus, and the e-mail has been quarantined to prevent furtherdamage. This means that your recipient received a message similar to thisinstead of the virus-infected e-mail. We recommend that you check yoursystemfor viruses before communicating further by using your computer.Our software reported the following about the infected e-mail:The e-mail was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]The e-mail subject: Are the instructions andE-mail contained this virus: Unknown VirusThe virus was located in this file: Unknown FileIf the recipient's address does not appear above,it is because of the nature of certain viruses,which corrupt such information.To find out more about the virus you e-mailed, click to www.sarc.com.To view virus related statistics, click towww.securitystats.com/virusstats.asp.
