RE: Re[4]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

Thanks Pete, I do not remember getting an update notification but that would definitely explain why we are getting go much spam now. Rick Hogue Intent.Net - Web Hosting 3802 Handley Avenue Louisville, KY 40218 1-502-459-3100 1-800-866-2983 Toll Free New Books Available "Prosperity Or Bet

Re: [sniffer] False Postive Processing more automation?

On Saturday, October 15, 2005, 3:51:22 PM, Scott wrote: > When I submit false positives to Sniffer about half come back rule clean. I then have to go to the logs and pull out those messages and resubmit the false positives with the log lines.   I believe I am FTPing up my log files to Sni

[sniffer] False Postive Processing more automation?

When I submit false positives to Sniffer about half come back rule clean. I then have to go to the logs and pull out those messages and resubmit the false positives with the log lines.   I believe I am FTPing up my log files to Sniffer nightly.   Isn't there a way to automatically pull these

Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

I just assumed it was a defective spamming software. - Original Message - From: "John T (Lists)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 2:10 PM Subject: RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through I wonder is that is some kind Outlook vulnerabil

RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

I wonder is that is some kind Outlook vulnerability. John T eServices For You > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Robert Grosshandler > Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 10:43 AM > To: sniffer@SortMonster.com > Subject: RE: Re[2]: [sniffe

Re[4]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

On Saturday, October 15, 2005, 12:33:47 PM, Rick wrote: RH> My only concern is that all of this was being caught by Sniffer before and RH> all of a sudden very little of it is being caught. We are told that they are RH> working on it to get it fixed but we are getting slammed by customers RH> tell

RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

We're seeing the header info in the body problem. It seems to be always spam. Another way it manifests itself is that Declude can't alter the Subject line properly. The folks at Declude tell us that they're aware of it, and that they are just waiting for more "pre altered by Declude" examples to

Re: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

For what it's worth, we have not see a major increase in spam this week either. Things seem pretty normal. We did recently upgrade to the Pro version of Declude Junkmail, and now it is much easier to block mail from certain countries (like .cz .ru etc.) as well as header and subject content,

RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

Rick, I, for one, have not seen any increase in spam getting through recently. It may be because I have so many other filters in front of Sniffer that my capture/reject rates are so high, but I have not had a single spam make it through to my own inbox this entire week. That's on the verge of a re

RE: Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

My only concern is that all of this was being caught by Sniffer before and all of a sudden very little of it is being caught. We are told that they are working on it to get it fixed but we are getting slammed by customers telling us we are not catching any spam. Any help in a solution other than g

Re[2]: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

LOL! On Saturday, October 15, 2005, 4:34:09 AM, John wrote: JTL> On a very off topic note, why are we still both up? JTL> John T JTL> eServices For You This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com

RE: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

John, Because we are both network admins, and the best time of the week to work on server changes is late at night, on weekends? That's my excuse! Being an insomniac doesn't hurt, either. :-) William Van Hefner Network Administrator Vantek Communications, Inc. 555 H Street, Ste. C Eureka, CA 95

RE: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

On a very off topic note, why are we still both up? John T eServices For You > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of William Van Hefner > Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 1:01 AM > To: sniffer@SortMonster.com > Subject: RE: [sniffer] Large

RE: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

John, This may be slightly OT. Hope Pete doesn't mind. :-) The default in greylisting that comes with Postfix is 300 seconds, although you can change that value to whatever you want. The first reason that greylisting was implemented was because almost no spamware ever tried resending messages at

RE: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

5 minutes would hardily be noticed. Discussions I was having with others involved delays of an hour or two. I do not see how "greylisting" a message for 5 minutes would help except when fighting harvesting or dictionary type spam attacks. John T eServices For You > -Original Message- >

RE: [sniffer] Large amounts of spam still getting through

John, I have no clue what the "legal implications" would be, as long as both my customers know that I'm using it and the sender is notified appropriately via SMTP. I use greylisting via IMGate/Postfix and it works like a charm. It takes a good couple of weeks to build up decent whitelist (both man