[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Pete McNeil




Hello Darin,

Friday, July 18, 2008, 1:12:39 PM, you wrote:




>


Hmmm... I don't think the rule was already pulled.  We update our rulebase upon receipt of the notification of a new rulebase being available, and according to our logs the rule was in until at least 11:24am EDT.





The rule bots would have queried the database for rules 20-40 minutes before you you received it. The rule may have still been in place at that time.

_M

-- 
Pete McNeil
Chief Scientist,
Arm Research Labs, LLC.



#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  the mailing list .
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Pete McNeil




Hello Darin,

Friday, July 18, 2008, 1:07:56 PM, you wrote:




>


Yes.  The rule is inert.  However, according to the logs the rule would have been hit 27 more times had we not added the rule panic.





Thanks for clarifying. If it were something else I'd want to get on that right away ;-)

_M


-- 
Pete McNeil
Chief Scientist,
Arm Research Labs, LLC.



#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  the mailing list .
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Darin Cox
Hmmm... I don't think the rule was already pulled.  We update our rulebase upon 
receipt of the notification of a new rulebase being available, and according to 
our logs the rule was in until at least 11:24am EDT.

Darin.


- Original Message - 
From: Pete McNeil 
To: Message Sniffer Community 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:12 PM
Subject: [sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Hello Darin,




Friday, July 18, 2008, 9:37:18 AM, you wrote:




  >
 Pete,



  There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm 
getting a number of FP hits on it from AOL users.
 




The rule has been pulled already.




_M













-- 

Pete McNeil

Chief Scientist,

Arm Research Labs, LLC.


#

This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to

  the mailing list .

To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Darin Cox
Yes.  The rule is inert.  However, according to the logs the rule would have 
been hit 27 more times had we not added the rule panic.

Darin.


- Original Message - 
From: Pete McNeil 
To: Message Sniffer Community 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 12:16 PM
Subject: [sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Hello Darin,




Friday, July 18, 2008, 11:39:47 AM, you wrote:




  >
 We had 18 hits on it from ~6:40-9:30am EDT before putting in the rule 
panic, 5 of which reached our hold weight.  We've had 27 more hits since adding 
the rule panic.
 




When a rule panic is in place the rule should be inert.




Please check your snf_engine_cfg.log to see if the rule panic was picked up in 
your configuration.




Best,




_M













-- 

Pete McNeil

Chief Scientist,

Arm Research Labs, LLC.


#

This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to

  the mailing list .

To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>




[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Pete McNeil




Hello Darin,

Friday, July 18, 2008, 11:39:47 AM, you wrote:




>


We had 18 hits on it from ~6:40-9:30am EDT before putting in the rule panic, 5 of which reached our hold weight.  We've had 27 more hits since adding the rule panic.





When a rule panic is in place the rule should be inert.

Please check your snf_engine_cfg.log to see if the rule panic was picked up in your configuration.

Best,

_M




-- 
Pete McNeil
Chief Scientist,
Arm Research Labs, LLC.



#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  the mailing list .
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Pete McNeil




Hello Darin,

Friday, July 18, 2008, 9:37:18 AM, you wrote:




>


Pete,
 
There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm getting a number of FP hits on it from AOL users.





The rule has been pulled already.

_M




-- 
Pete McNeil
Chief Scientist,
Arm Research Labs, LLC.



#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
  the mailing list .
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send administrative queries to  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>



[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Darin Cox
We had 18 hits on it from ~6:40-9:30am EDT before putting in the rule panic, 5 
of which reached our hold weight.  We've had 27 more hits since adding the rule 
panic.

Darin.


- Original Message - 
From: Colbeck, Andrew 
To: Message Sniffer Community 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 11:30 AM
Subject: [sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


I also have hit this. A single hit, also from AOL.


Andrew.





From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 6:37 AM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Pete,

There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm getting a 
number of FP hits on it from AOL users.

Darin.


[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Colbeck, Andrew
I've just used proper channels and submitted the message and the snippet
from the MessageSniffer log to the false@ email address.
 
I've also added this:
 

 
to the
 

 
section of the snf_engine.xml file on each of my servers.
 
 
Andrew.
 
 



From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 8:31 AM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


I also have hit this. A single hit, also from AOL.
 
 
Andrew.
 



From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 6:37 AM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Pete,
 
There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm
getting a number of FP hits on it from AOL users.

Darin.
 


[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Darin Cox
Any word on this?

Darin.


- Original Message - 
From: Darin Cox 
To: Message Sniffer Community 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 9:37 AM
Subject: [sniffer] Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Pete,

There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm getting a 
number of FP hits on it from AOL users.

Darin.


[sniffer] Re: Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning

2008-07-18 Thread Colbeck, Andrew
I also have hit this. A single hit, also from AOL.
 
 
Andrew.
 



From: Message Sniffer Community [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 6:37 AM
To: Message Sniffer Community
Subject: [sniffer] Problem with Sniffer-Porn rule this morning


Pete,
 
There appears to be a problem with rule 1984485 this morning.  I'm
getting a number of FP hits on it from AOL users.

Darin.