I mentioned in a previous post that we had experienced something similar at
about that time and resolved it a day or so later by re-installing sniffer
when service restarts, reboots and some basic troubleshooting did not give
us the results we needed. At this point that still seems to have
I should add that Sniffer has been pretty much trouble free for us. We have
been using it since before the ARM research days (10+ years as a guess).
One of the specialized clients we host for goes through a cycle every few
years where they are very publically visible and there are a number of
David Gregg's mxGuard product has been rock solid for us for years but a
full integration into SmarterMail would be nice.
From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf
Of John Moore
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2013 5:32 AM
To: Message Sniffer
I'd be willing to take a shot at it in the dead of the night (when spam
ratio is high) and if we get through that in production during the day. Is
there any failsafe in place to remove it from the loop if it detects it is
not performing as expected?
I wonder whether it doesn't become a solution in search of a problem. David
Gregg over at mxGuard is small to be sure and on the licensing plan he's
used in recent years I suppose mxGuard might quite working if he ceased
doing business; however, his product is very reasonably priced, very light
MxGuard is availabe for SmarterMail now.
From: Pete McNeil
Sender: Message Sniffer Community
To: Message Sniffer Community
ReplyTo: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Re: New proactive false positive preventioninitiatives
Sent: Feb 4, 2010 14:25
We have a regional based trap running post-Sniffer. When Sniffer hiccups
(or we've done something to cause it to hiccup) there are thousands of mails
in it over the space of a few hours, almost all spam.
There is no increase there overnight so our rulebases are definitely still
I remember there was some small trick to this when I did it a year or so
ago. If I remember right there was a change to the MxGuard INI file that
wasn't obvious. I'll take a look in a bit and see if I can get back to you
- Original Message -
I haven't finished looking but one note I did make was that the syntax in
MxGuard.INI had changed slightly to include a comma.
Our working file under v1.7: SpamFilterType=NATIVE SNIFFER
Our working file under v3.1: SpamFilterType=NATIVE, SNIFFER
I will continue to look at
Phil / Jay:
I am also looking at SmarterMail as an addition to or replacement for
several IMail servers and looking at calling MessageSniffer from it without
Declude because of the Declude bundling of things we don't want or see value
in. While doing a little more reading on the SmarterTools
Mail list logo