REVDNS:Re: [Declude.JunkMail] multiple actions per test

2001-05-13 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is there a way to have multiple actions taken on a single test. For instance, I'd like to add a WARN message to a header and HOLD it. I tried adding multiple lines but that didn't seem to work. I also tried a space delimited list. There isn't a way to have multiple actions per test.

REVDNS:Re: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMROUTING - false positive sample

2001-05-14 Thread R. Scott Perry
05/14/2001 12:01:17 Q0141028 Msg failed SPAMROUTING (spam routing [2103]). 05/14/2001 12:01:17 Q0141028 Subject: AW: NAB2001 Release 05/14/2001 12:01:17 Q0141028 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This one actually should not have failed the SPAMROUTING test. Declude thought

REVDNS:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMHEADERS false positives

2001-05-14 Thread R. Scott Perry
But Scott - it appears that there IS a Message-ID in the piece that you quoted me!? Yes -- but it is one that IMail adds. I forgot to mention that. IMail will add the Message-ID: header if it does not yet exist, using the domain that the mail claims to be from.

REVDNS:Re: [Declude.JunkMail] no warning message

2001-05-14 Thread R. Scott Perry
At 01:24 PM 5/14/01 -0500, you wrote: I am getting messages with X-RBL-Warning: but no warning. Maybe I misunderstood the new deal - do I have to put something after WARN. Or what does this mean? It looks like the REVDNS test may be causing that. You can either wait until the next release,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SPAMROUTING - domain vs IP origin

2001-05-15 Thread R. Scott Perry
But I wonder if that is really that unusual. I'm hosting several RIPE country code sites (such as .cc, .de, .at) - and, if they co-locate a server with me or use dedicating hosting, they could very well have a .cc, .de, .at SMTP server with an IP address that is within the ARIN block not the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail]

2001-07-08 Thread R. Scott Perry
Sorry for the ignorance but here it goes. I am using Norton Av v5 for Windows NT4 on a machine that does virus scan, backup and network monitor. Will Declude Virus work with Norton Anti Virus v5? We do not recommend using any Norton products with Declude. There are two different command line

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Feature Request - Adjustable failedmessage sampling

2001-08-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
I've lost the download urls :( Outlook archived my messages.. http://www.declude.com/JunkMail/manual.htm . -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] White List Failure ?

2001-08-08 Thread R. Scott Perry
Hop=0 and HopHigh=1. The origin IP is NOT specified as an IPBYPASS The origin IP IS specified as a WHITELIST So, Declude should have let it pass, right? It sounds like Declude should have let it pass. Do you know if it came straight into the IMail server, or came through a backup server? If

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] can't get WARN to work

2001-08-15 Thread R. Scott Perry
I'm having trouble getting the WARN action to work. It doesn't seem to do anything. I've used the set RSP off test email to trigger the RSP test, and I've got RSP WARN configured, but nothing gets added to the header of the email. What you need to do is send a plaintext E-mail that has rsp

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] SMTP AUTH counted as MAPS DUL?

2001-08-30 Thread R. Scott Perry
If DUL should be disabled in the global config file - shouldn't pretty much all other IP4 tests also be excluded? It depends on your situation. In most cases, DUL should not be used for outgoing mail (or else all E-mail from dialup customers could get caught). Other tests, though, such as

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] imail / declude access violations sincethe install of declude

2001-09-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Actually Scott, I think the problem might actually be the 100 Dr. Watson messages piling up waiting to be acknowledged, is the reason for the resource depletion. As we close the DR Watson messages, memory comes back down to a normal usage level. This sounds like a different issue. The known

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Might wanna fix that :) declude failsOSRELAY

2001-09-05 Thread R. Scott Perry
Messages from declude.com are failing the OSRELAY tests. Yes, they (silently) added us to their database a few days ago. We're waiting to hear back from them about getting us out of it. Apparently, they are now aggressively scanning IPs to find open relays (before they were only listing

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] [Declude.Virus] Bug in 1.25a?

2001-09-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
I may have found a bug in 1.25a. I had REVDNS set up to delete mail from mail servers with no reverse dns. You should be aware that a lot of mail servers do not have reverse DNS entries, and you'll likely delete a lot of E-mail that way. Since I installed 1.25a last night it was deleting mail

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Headers?

2001-09-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
You gave me the same advice in on 9/6/2001 14:29, After that I downloaded 1.25a from your site and installed it. The last mail with the broken headers I posted was received when 1.25a was already installed. If you go to a command prompt and type declude -diag, does it show 1.25a there? Is

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] www.DNSReport.com - Error if no MXrecord

2001-09-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
Here another domain I'm working on http://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=Supremesshoes.com This is just a mirror domain, it has no MX records (it only has the domain CNAME). Now take a look at the MX record analysis. 1) The report says: You have 1 MX record: but

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] [Declude.Virus] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:Reading Headers byDeclude

2001-09-08 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have not had good luck with Bad Headers, so I made a rule to monitor them in my SpamBox account. This should work, right? The Declude header additions should be written before Imail is given the message correct? Yes, that is correct. The main problem I have with Bad Headers is that it will

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE:declude crashing system

2001-09-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
I didn't change this setting before, but mine was set at ,1024 already and Declude crashes almost every night. Would this problem lessen if I defined a maximum number of Declude sessions at once? That depends on exactly what is happening. Declude is very crash resistant. If Declude itself

[Declude.JunkMail] If you are running v1.25...

2001-09-10 Thread R. Scott Perry
FYI- Anyone who is running Declude JunkMail v1.25 should upgrade to v1.25a. There is a problem with Declude JunkMail v1.25 (fixed in 1.25a) that can cause outgoing E-mail to have the headers corrupted in a way that they can appear in the E-mail. This problem may not be apparent right

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-11 Thread R. Scott Perry
Hello, since I upgraded to declude 1.25a sometimes the following happens: 1. Declude logs something like this: 09/11/2001 04:18:48 Q743b0de (Error 5 at 77fcb9b1 v1.25a) 09/11/2001 04:18:48 Q743b0de (log part 1 saved as C:\declude.gp1) 09/11/2001 04:18:48 Q743b0de (Error 5 at 77fcb892 v1.25a)

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-12 Thread R. Scott Perry
other similar information? What *exactly* does the error message say, the complete text of it? I can't recall ever seeing NT/2000 report a crash without at least the memory address that the crash occurred at. user32.dll is the main text of the message. There is just the pop up window

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-13 Thread R. Scott Perry
If anyone has any further advise, I am eagerly, but patiently, waiting. It seems like there aren't many (although there are some) programs that encounter this problem. The real solution would be for Ipswitch not to start a new process for each E-mail delivery. But, the earliest that could

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-13 Thread R. Scott Perry
We are also have a problem with Declude recently. It doesn't crash our system per say but it causes our system to go to 100% CPU utilization, memory usage goes way up and SMTP timesout (even though there are a lot of STMP Declude processes showing up). We haven't seen that here, but have had

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-17 Thread R. Scott Perry
My problems also began after upgrading to 1.25a, before the upgrade Declude never crashed. Now I need 2 reboots a day to keep my mail working. Do you recall which version you were running before that? If I can find out which version introduced this problem, it will be easier to find out what

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-17 Thread R. Scott Perry
As I've stated several times: I'm not getting an error message, no files are being created and no event log messages. (I'll double check my gigantic log files to be sure of the first..) It appears that there are 3 separate issues (you're seeing #1): [1] 100% CPU usage, that appears to have

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] ByPassing IP's

2001-09-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
This may be a stupid question but I can't figure it out. I would like Declude to bypass a certain amount of IP addresses. These are mostly feedbacks and e-mail forms coming from some web pages I host. When people receive the forms it fails the SPAMHEADERS test and gets a note. I attempted to

Re: MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:[Declude.JunkMail] Declude usingGlobal.cfg for test settings

2001-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
For some reason, it is using the settings in the Global.cfg file for running the tests instead of $default$.JunkMail For example the $default$.JunkMail action for BadHeaders is set to Warn, and in the Global.cfg file BadHeaders is set for Subject. When an email fails the BadHeaders test it

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] syntaxt for WARN action?

2001-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
What is the exact syntax for the WARN action? Normally, you would use just TESTNAME WARN; for example, MAILFROM WARN. This will add a default X-RBL-Warning: header in the E-mail. You can instead add your own text, such as MAILFROM WARN This E-mail came from an address that can not be

Re: [Declude.JunkMail]

2001-09-20 Thread R. Scott Perry
---Unfortunately, that's what I've been doing (using WARN by itself) and I am not getting anything added to the email header - it just seems to ignore everything. Try adding %WARNING% after it, like this: MAILFROMWARN%WARNING% It may be that for some reason Declude sees

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] logging options for junkmail...

2001-09-21 Thread R. Scott Perry
We want to change our logging options so that non-spam emails are not logged. You can add a line LOG_OK NONE to the \IMail\Declude\global.cfg file, and Declude won't record information about non-spams. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Whitelist

2001-09-21 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is WHITELIST on the global.cfg specific to Declude JunkMail or is it also taken into account by Declude Hijack ? It is specific to Declude JunkMail. For Declude Hijack, you can use ALLOWIP 127.0.0.1 in \IMail\Declude\hijack.cfg. -Scott --- This

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-21 Thread R. Scott Perry
FYI- We now have an interim release available online at http://www.declude.com/release/126/declude.exe that adds a new configuration option PIDDEBUG ON, that should signifcantly help in tracking down the 99% CPU problem. When that line is added to the global.cfg file, Declude will save a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] creating my own spam dns server

2001-09-23 Thread R. Scott Perry
How do I put the IP address of a spammer into our DNS server for use as a spam test? I've defined the test in the declude config files per your earlier message. Do I just create a zone record with the full IP address? I.E. spammer is a.b.c.d, so I create a new zone d.c.b.a.spam.ourdomain.com?

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Strange Issue - Possible issue withNorton 2001 and Declude

2001-09-24 Thread R. Scott Perry
We've been running Declude Junkmail for a while now with no problems. In light of the recent Nimda issue, we installed a copy of Norton 2001 on this server. Shortly after this, several people have reported that e-mails are being randomly BCC'd to individuals that were never added to the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have tried my best to help with this issue, research, testing, etc. During a normal business day, declude is awesome - working very nicely as advertised and very reliable. Perhaps, on an email server with less traffic, some declude customers wouldn't even know of any reliability issues.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
There is a tweak for this in declude. You can set the maximum number of decludes that will run at one time. This helps set limits in cases like this. Actually, the MAXATONCE option only affects the number of virus scanner processes that are started. It does not affect the number of

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
We now have a new interim declude.exe online, at http://www.declude.com/release/126/declude.exe . This one is based on 1.25a, except that the DNS engine has been modified to make sure that infinite loops are not possible. Right now, the most likely reason for the 99% CPU usage seems to be

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and taking up 99% CPU

2001-09-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
should we use this even if we don't have the 99% cpu problem? No, you should not. The interim release should only be used by people who are experiencing that problem. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com

2001-09-27 Thread R. Scott Perry
X-RBL-Warning: domain: whatever.com What test is an email failing when the above is the warning? That's most likely the MAILFROM test that is failing. That test will fail if an E-mail arrives with a return address that is from a domain that does not accept E-mail. There's a slight chance,

[Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.26a

2001-10-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
We have just released Declude v1.26a, which has the same functionality as 1.26 (which was taken offline because the declude.exe turned out to be corrupted). -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe,

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Question about the Pro version

2001-10-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
Can we mix Declude Junkmail Pro version with Virus standard version? Yes, that is fine. Declude uses the same declude.exe file for all the Declude products, to keep it efficient. Your activation codes will determine which version of Declude JunkMail and/or Declude Virus will be running, so

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Customized WARN message in header?

2001-10-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
I would like to be able to customize the WARN message that junkmail puts in the header of the message. The reason I would like to do this is so that end users can filter based on that header, without having to enter a rule for every test that we test a message for. For example instead of

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:spam filterproblems with ezsignup

2001-10-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
I appreciate the reply, but how do i fix it now, ( put a message id header as you mentioned below) this is a simple autoresponder message the person gets when they fill out a submission form on our site. How would i fix it. You need to update the software that sends the E-mail (blat? CDONTS?).

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:spam filterproblems with ezsignup

2001-10-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
By the way we use Cold fusion's mailer cf_mail to send it here is the code... Then the problem is with the way that Cold Fusion is sending the mail (not adding the Message-ID: header that it should add). -Scott --- This E-mail came from the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:spam filterproblems with ezsignup

2001-10-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
or this ... 20011004 080810 127.0.0.1 SMTP (952) Trying trimble.com (0) 20011004 080810 127.0.0.1 SMTP (952) Connect trimble.com [206.40.88.20:25] (1) 20011004 080823 127.0.0.1 SMTP (952) 220 authorized ESMTP access only 20011004 080823 127.0.0.1 SMTP (952) EHLO

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:spam filterproblems with ezsignup

2001-10-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Some servers DO permit the syntax of [216.126.27.237] - the square brackets indicating that this is to be treated as an IP address NOT as a FQDN. I can't say, if that syntax is valid for the Message ID - or if it is only valid as a FROM. Yes, the [ip.ip.ip.ip] format is acceptable in a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
However, I recently saw a reference to a whitelist feature that is not documented in anything I have seen thus far. Is there any online reference to the Declude JunkMail product that would give me a better idea of what to expect? That hasn't been officially documented yet, but here it is: You

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Tests

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Forgive me Scott but I forgot this. What is the command line to check to see what tests Declude is running. Amount active etc.. You can type declude -diag to see some diagnostic information, which includes a list of the tests that Declude JunkMail has defined.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Along the lines of undocumneted tests, is ADULT another test in beta? I saw it on your recently cught spam page. Yes, that is another undocumented test, designed to catch E-mail with adult content. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Can the same feature be used to allow users to add their own whitelist entries or is this an exclusively 'global' function? It is global. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: Question about JunkMail filteringand aliases

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Example sent to alias: X-RBL-Warning: Requested by rsp set off. X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Example sent to actual account: X-RBL-Warning:NETADV-JUNKMAIL-ALERT-ORDB X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To get a better idea of what is happening, you can use the Declude debug mode. To do this,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
What version of declude is the in? The WHITELIST configuration option was added in v1.19. -Scott --- 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.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Any chance that this will be added to the user configurable options at some point in the future? I can see that it could be a big plus for some folks. We don't have plans for per-user whitelisting at this time, but have added it to the suggestion database.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Excuse the ignorance here, but what is needed to set up this ADULT test. We have not given out instructions on how to set up that test yet. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Product Info Questions

2001-10-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
I am running pro and use my mailbox as a test box for tests before setting the default filters for all other users, and would like to test the undocumented tests out, are there any others, have you thought about making a uae at your own risk list for the more daring lot out here? You can define

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Problem with DSNReport.com

2001-10-20 Thread R. Scott Perry
http://www.dnsreport.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=tovlighting.com reports missing MX Reverse Lookup - yet, at the same time I just checked, and it did show that there was a reverse DNS entry. It could have been a DNS problem when you ran the test, or simply a timeout error (which for some

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] FW: Question about JunkMail filteringand aliases

2001-10-22 Thread R. Scott Perry
OK, I switched the loglevel to debug sent the two messages again, one to admin and one to reg from my yahoo account, then switched the loglevel back to low. The problem is that when you send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], IMail doesn't forward it to [EMAIL PROTECTED], it forwards it to [EMAIL

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Issue with wrong .junkmail file used

2001-10-24 Thread R. Scott Perry
I recieved some spam that was processed by the $default$.junkmail file when there is a cmfrolick.junkmail file to process my mail, and I am running the pro version. Below is a snipet from the log file. 10/24/2001 10:03:18 Qd82914c 000615 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] FYI on OSDUL

2001-10-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
Just a quick heads up about the OSDUL test. It has been a good test for catching SPAM. BUT! We use Qwest for our National POPs and keep having problems with their IPs being listed in the DNSBL database. That's the way it's supposed to work. The OSDUL (and the original DUL test by MAPS) is

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Reject msgs that fail multiple tests.

2001-10-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
Can Junkmail be setup to perform actions (warn, hold, subject, etc) when combinations of tests are failed? Not yet. For example, I get many good msgs that fail the REVDNS test, but many spam msgs fail the REVDNS and some other test. I would like to allow the first and not the second. We are

Re: DSN:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Reject msgs that fail multipletests.

2001-10-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
That would be a good feature to have. Any time line on it? No, it is not possible yet to say when it will be added. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] [Declude.Virus][Declude.Junkmail] FYI on OSDUL

2001-10-25 Thread R. Scott Perry
As you may know I run 2 of the 6 nameservers for the relays.osirusoft.com zone, and I'm very surprised that there are Qwest IP's in the DNSBL list. The DUL and OSDUL tests are *supposed* to have Qwest IP's in there (assuming that they are dialup IPs). The DUL/OSDUL tests, by design, should

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Subject Setting?

2001-10-31 Thread R. Scott Perry
We have had junkmail running for a few months now, but am just really beginning to start using it to its full potential. I have created a per-user check for my email to check everything and it is set to SUBJECT. When something is caught it appears it is just putting SPAM in the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:Hijack emailnotifications

2001-11-01 Thread R. Scott Perry
Are there any email notifications for Declude Hijack similiar to Declude virus? Is there a way to notify customers that they are trying to send too much mail or at least let them know that their email did not go because they went over the Hijack threshhold? No, it is not currently possible to

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.28

2001-11-01 Thread R. Scott Perry
In the release notes you mention that HEUR has been set to have mutliple levels. How does this benefit us? Does a level 1 return a weight of 1 and so on? You're a step ahead of the class. G The weighting now gives new life to the heuristics test. Where it wasn't useful before as a test by

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Docs for all tests

2001-11-01 Thread R. Scott Perry
#POSTFIXIP ipfile d:\imail\declude\postfix\spamlist.map 2 0 #POSTFIXFROMfromfiled:\imail\declude\postfix\no_send.map2 0 These tests were designed to help support the files used with Postfix. They aren't yet documented; we will mostly expand on

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail v1.28

2001-11-01 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is it possible to specify 2 different actions to take on a single failed test? Although Declude JunkMail doesn't have support for multiple actions per test, there is a workaround that will produce the same results -- you can define two separate tests. For example: If a message fails the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail NOT Registered

2001-11-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
11/02/2001 01:00:01 Q44700ec Declude JunkMail NOT Registered This happened when I upgraded to 1.28 beta. What do I need to do? I'm a paying customer for 1.26a. That shouldn't have happened because of the upgrade. Did you change the Official Host Name of your mail server?

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude JunkMail NOT Registered

2001-11-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
Yes. I did. Is Junkmail bound to that name? Can I reregister a copy with the new name? Yes, the activation code is tied into the Official Host Name. Just E-mail me the new Official Host Name (off-list), and I'll take care of it for you. -Scott ---

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Imail peer servers

2001-11-02 Thread R. Scott Perry
We haven't been able to use declude due to an issue we have with our server (the user32.dll issue). With declude enabled, our server crashes 1 - 2 times per week. Have you tried v1.27a or higher, which includes Declude Queue ( http://www.declude.com/dq.htm ), which is designed to help with

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Slow down of mail?

2001-11-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
As I just checked our logs, it seems that the latest beta version introduced a new delay, causing all mail to take at least 10 seconds to process. I guess that's something else we'll need to look into! I'm using 1.27a ... does it have this same problem? No, just the latest beta version

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Heur Cumulative?

2001-11-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
a) are HEUR tests cumulative, e.g.: HEUR10 heuristics 10 x 4 0 HEUR9 heuristics 9 x 4 0 HEUR8 heuristics 8 x 3 0 HEURheuristics If the HEUR value is 0., will the weight be: 3 for HEUR8

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Postfixgate usage?

2001-11-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
If I joing postfixgate do I get a kill file with addresses/domains that becomes my kill.lst file? Or does it become another test for Junkmail to attach to? If its the latter, how do I set it up? You get the files from postfixgate, and it becomes another test in Declude. All you need to do is

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Percent

2001-11-05 Thread R. Scott Perry
What is the entry which goes in global.cfg for the Percent test? It should be PERCENT percent x x 10. Then, in the $default$.JunkMail file, you can use PERCENT HOLD or whatever you like. -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weighting

2001-11-05 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is it possible to include the weighting (see below) at the Mid Log level? I'd like to see it, but I'd also like to avoid running the log at High. Weighting from Log (High): BADHEADERS:5 SPAMHEADERS:5 HEUR10:5 . Total weight = 15 That will be done for the next release.

Re: MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Slow down ofmail?

2001-11-05 Thread R. Scott Perry
Actually, there is no delay in the new beta version. The ORBL test has gone under, and its nameservers are stuck in a black hole and not responding, causing a timeout. After removing the ORBL test, the last few E-mails we received were scanned in about one second. I guess that means

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 1.28 - WhiteList not working

2001-11-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
the following mail failed despite the IP being WHITELISTED globally as well as individually. This is causing QUITE a problem. Note that in Declude JunkMail, you can only whitelist on a global basis. The WHITELIST line only works in \IMail\Declude\global.cfg. Also note that failures will

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 1.28 - SwitchRecip not effective?

2001-11-06 Thread R. Scott Perry
I defined SWITCHRECIP ON but it's still using Declude\$default$.junkmail instead of Declude\WebsterWatch.com\$default$.junkmail Actually, it's trying to use Declude\mail.webhost.hm-software.com\$default$.junkmail . I'll have to look into why it is still

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Various Debug Logs and Bug Reports?

2001-11-15 Thread R. Scott Perry
any word on the result of the debug logs that I had posted last week or so? I'm not pushing for a new release, I'm just trying to stay abreast whether the problems have been recognized, whether more information is needed, etc. It's being worked on. The debugging is going a little slower than

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] ORBZ Black List

2001-11-15 Thread R. Scott Perry
It doesn't matter to me whether we use the JunkMail product or the Hijack product. I simply want to stop the external spammers from using our server as a relay point and at the same time I want to stop the scans from groups like ORBZ. In our situation we have to keep an open relay because of

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Idea for declude

2001-11-16 Thread R. Scott Perry
Why not make Declude a threaded service and let imail call a dummy 'pass.exe' or something that only transfers the parameters to the service and then exits immediately? That is something that we have given some thought to. Then you can do all sorts of nifty things like DNS caching... We

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] What test gives this message?

2001-11-21 Thread R. Scott Perry
Which test generates this message? X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [80008002]. That header comes from the BADHEADERS test (which checks for headers that are not formatted properly, which is very common in spam, and should never happen with legitimate mail). The

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] What test gives this message?

2001-11-21 Thread R. Scott Perry
We see any email sent from Eudora getting tagged like this... Is this normal? No, that's not normal. Could you send me the headers from one of the E-mails that is getting caught like that? -Scott --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Imail as a gateway

2001-12-05 Thread R. Scott Perry
We have a client that would like for us to act a gateway for their email server. The instructions from IPSwitch seem very simple. If we set him up, can we make a directory in the declude directory and customize the spam filters for his domain just like any virtual domain on our server? (I

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 - 3D before IP address

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
some of the bounce messages include a 3D before the IP address, example: Mail Server: 213.98.118.212 [.uni.eresmas.com] Description: WEIGHT10 (Weight of 20 exceeds the limit of 10.) More Info: http://apps.declude.com/tools/ip4r.ch?ip=3D213.98.118.212 This sounds like a bug in

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 - 3D before IP address

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
Would you mind looking at the enclosed two files. One represents a file that HAS a 3D= the other does not. I see that the Imail header DOES look different - so your explanation may be correct. I tried sending both E-mails to myself (using the headers and body you supplied), and on Eudora

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 beta - Arbitrary Logging,and Weighting IS broken!

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
Look at this Imail SMTP conversation: 12:07 11:26 SMTPD(061103F8) [63.107.174.78] connect 128.121.122.40 port 3699 OK, this IP is listed in OSSRC, FIVETENOPTIN, SPAMCOP, WIREHUB, and POSTFIXGATE. Now look at the Declude log for Qeda33f8: 12/07/2001 11:26:24 Qeda33f8 OSSRC:7 SPAMCOP:7 .

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 - FULLMSG not working

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
The %FULLMSG% variable is not working at all with the BANnotify.eml even with very small attachments, like a .bat file with just an @echo off in it and a couple of lines in the message body. I have test it with your newest 1.29a version and the problem continues, are you still working on this?

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 - FULLMSG not working

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
Yes I do have the carriage return at the end of the line. I'm attaching my BANnotify.eml. It turns out that the %FULLMSG% only works with Declude JunkMail, and shouldn't be used as it will send back the attachments, as well. You can replace the %FULLMSG% with %HEADERS% for now. We should

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 beta - Errors

2001-12-07 Thread R. Scott Perry
Offcourse I don't mind, here are they. This seems to be the issue with the %MAILFROM% that was fixed in v1.29a ( http://www.declude.com/release/129/declude.exe ), so that should take care of the problem. If not, please do let me know. Thanks. -Scott ---

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.29 beta - Arbitrary Logging,and Weighting IS broken!

2001-12-08 Thread R. Scott Perry
sorry, but something IS wrong with the log and the weighting. No matter how you twist and turn G. Fortunately, with 1.29 it finally is apparent, even to the naked eye: OK -- I've gone through the issues and reports with 1.29, and it looks like there is only one outstanding issue (albeit a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] [IMail Forum] undeliverable mail?

2001-10-09 Thread R. Scott Perry
What does this message mean? This is from the same domain which has been renewed but they are still getting undeliverables. 20011009 112717 127.0.0.1 SMTP (576) 221 jumpgate.speedlinetech.com SMTP Service closing transmission channel That means that when IMail tried sending the mail,

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Pegasus mail getting RBL Warning

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
I also see BADHEADER Error when a message is sent using the ASPMail component. Do you know if there is an way around this? I don't currently have an example, but I will get one in the next few days I am sure if you would like to view it. I would need to see the headers (or the code

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Sample GLOBAL.CFG

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
What is the reason for the section starting with #DORKS through #POSTFIXGATE to be remarked out of the sample GLOBAL.CFG file? The tests that are commented out are either ones that require subscriptions, or for other reasons normally would not be used. They are included (but commented out)

[Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.30 released (beta)

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Computerized Horizons has just released Declude JunkMail v1.30. Notable changes include: o Previous releases could miss the first character of usernames in certain cases; fixed. o No longer fails BADHEADERS test with Pegasus's Message-ID: header (even though it is technically invalid) o Adds

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.30 released (beta)

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Will our old version of Delcude and the basic config file work with the new one? All we were using it for was basic RBL tests. Yes, it will. The new releases of Declude are designed to be backwards-compatible with the config files from older releases.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:SpamCop Filter and

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Scott, my understanding is that SpamCop is updated automatically real-time by users that spam reports expire automatically after one week? Is this correct? That is correct. It will automatically expire one week after the last spam report is received. This means it doesn't expire if it

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Version 1.3.0 - Weighting is BROKENagain

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. But after working since the interims release from last week, the official 1.3.0 has broken the WEIGHT feature again. Can we please get this re-fixed again. Well, let's see what the problem is first. It's a different problem than before. Look at the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Verison 1.3.0 - Custom Warnings Broken

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Now, look at the following SMTP header and notice that my custom text does NOT appear at all? X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was sent from a broken mail client [a0020103]. X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [a0020103]. X-RBL-Warning: This E-mail was sent

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] ORBL still in your Config sample

2001-12-18 Thread R. Scott Perry
Every so often I match my config files to your samples. I see that you added ORBL back in - but your IP4r page claims it no longer exists. Who is right? You are. It is gone, and the config files for the next release will reflect that. -Scott --- [This

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] S-ORBZOUTPUTS:RE: Config files (Was:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude v1.30 released (beta))

2001-12-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
I haven't installed 1.30, but I am running 1.29a In that case, I would recommend disabling the ORBZOUTPUTS test. It sounds like they may have pulled an ORBS, and disappeared, while returning a positive response on everything from certain DNS servers to get people to turn it off.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >