At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote:
Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service agreements.
Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets what
they deserve.
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This
]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 10:51 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
At 07:59 AM 1/2/2005 +1100, you wrote:
Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service
agreements.
Anyone that runs production software without service agreements gets
I think somebody already mentioned it.
-d
- Original Message -
From: Jerry Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude
Why not just set the SPAMHEADERS weight to zero in GLOBAL.CFG as a
workaround until the problem is fixed by a new release?
---
[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
a decision whether to increase some other
tests by a point or so to compensate.
-d
- Original Message -
From: Harry Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 1:21 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Why not just set
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I don't think that's fair for a bug like this. Declude has never been
presented as being a time sensitive licensed product.
I know some of my old installs are still probably using older versions
without other issues. I've made my
, 2005 3:20 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I think Jerry has this right. Both our Declude and IMail support agreements
are currently lapsed. We were planning on renewing both in early 2005 when
Ipswitch had their big fiasco over
I'm in the same situation. I would hope for some sort of free bug fix.
Perhaps release bug fixed versions of a few old versions could work?
-Dan
At 03:19 PM 1/3/2005, you wrote:
I think Jerry has this right. Both our Declude and IMail support agreements
are currently lapsed. We were planning on
I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement about
the Spam
Header test being broken officially from Declude, more timely, and along
with advice what to do in the interim. This is not the same Declude
operation to me as in years past!
FWIW, it was handled very similarly to
: Monday, January 03, 2005 4:02 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
I also agree it would have been nice to have a warning announcement
about the Spam Header test being broken officially from Declude, more
timely, and along with advice what to do
am spoiled by how proactive Declude has been in the past.
Marc
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 4:02 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch
1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the
problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just a
hey we know within 24 hours would've been nice.
Yes, that would have been nice. It did take a bit more than 24 hours for
an official response on
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of marc catuogno
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 04:50 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Scott,
I have been and still am a very satisfied Declude customer. I wasn't
looking for a faster fix, or an interim release, I
The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test,
anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the
test.
But that's forcing admins to comb their logs to find out what test is
malfunctioning, likely with Declude turned off entirely and
Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor test,
anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment out the
test.
But that's forcing admins to comb their logs to find out what test is
malfunctioning
03, 2005 5:00 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the
problem - it WAS a holiday and I think people should have lives - but just
a
hey we know within 24 hours would've been nice.
Yes, that would have
On another note... has anyone seen any sort of (cascading?) effect from the
SpamHeaders glitch?
I seem to have a fair amount of email winding up in our hold file that
failed both our weight tests and an IP hold test. They should have been
deleted based on the weight test, but are being held
On another note... has anyone seen any sort of (cascading?) effect from
the SpamHeaders glitch?
There aren't any, designed effects.
Specifically, all the SPAMHEADERS issue does is causes E-mails to fail the
SPAMHEADERS test. That adds weight to the E-mail, and if any actions are
performed on
R. Scott Perry wrote:
The main reason this wasn't done was because it wasn't clear that this
was going to be as big an issue for our customers as it turned out to
be. The thought was that since this is normally a relatively minor
test, anyone that it does affect adversely would just comment
.
Oh well, just my unsolicited opinion (they're a dime a dozen, you know)...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
R. Scott Perry wrote
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 5:01 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
1. An acknowledgement on the list from someone that they knew about the
problem - it WAS a holiday and I think
l, just my unsolicited opinion (they're a dime a dozen, you know)...
Bill
- Original Message -
From: "Matt" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Communications
for all your Internet Needs.
Phone 9977 3788 Fax 9977 3844
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ncl Admin
Sent: Tuesday, 4 January 2005 02:51
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders
Hi,
I've spent hundreds of hours (literally) adjusting the weights and
tests, adding sniffer, my own filters, etc to get the highest possible
catch rate with the lowest possible false positive rate.
I also delete at one weight and hold at a different weight to give
me a margin of error. I don't
Hi,
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Using Declude 1.79i7.
Were there any warnings on this?
Is anybody else seeing it?
-Dave
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Using Declude 1.79i7.
Hi,
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I
checked my normal mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Using Declude 1.79i7.
Hmmm running 1.81 overhere and same problem. SPAMHEADERS on every mail
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent an email direct to Scott
and Barry.
-d
- Original Message -
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch
Hi,
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my
normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Time to disable the SpamHeaders test until this gets fixed.
I set it to zero weight
: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Hi,
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my
normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Time to disable
Of John Tolmachoff (Lists)
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 8:54 AM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Yep, I am also seeing it.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent an email direct to Scott
and Barry.
Why run the test at all if you're going to set the weight to zero anyway -
just comment out the test until it's fixed.
I can see this causing
] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent an email direct to Scott
and Barry.
Why run the test at all if you're going to set the weight to zero anyway -
just comment out the test until it's fixed.
I
] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Hi,
I had a couple of false positives this morning caused in part by
SPAMHEADERS
apparently objecting to 2005 as an invalid year. When I checked my
normal
mail, everything I checked failed SPAMHEADERS.
Time to disable the SpamHeaders test until this gets fixed.
I set
Did anyone try loosen spamheaders on?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Landry
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 12:36 PM
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
- Original Message
-
From: Bill Landry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent
://www.invariantsystems.com
- Original Message -
From: marc catuogno [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Did anyone try loosen spamheaders on?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Darrell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
However, one would hope they would send a mass mailing out soon to all their
customers notifying them of this issue.
Agreed. This can cause widespread issues. Thankfully I only had a few
false positives caused by this additional hit, and it was caught
Of Bill Landry
Sent: Sunday, 2 January 2005 04:36
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
- Original Message -
From: Dave Doherty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I set it to zero weight temporarily. I also sent an email
direct to Scott
and Barry
of the buisness model is needed.
- Original Message -
From: Glen Harvy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.JunkMail@declude.com
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 8:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 2005 SpamHeaders Glitch?
Great way to increase sales due to the need to update service
40 matches
Mail list logo
