[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-18 Thread Pete McNeil
Richard Stupek wrote: A question about using the XCI bad command. Assume an email passes through sniffer and does not trigger any rules, I then run it through and determine it is in fact spam. I send a bad command to let sniffer know the IP address had a bad event. Won't the good event that

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-17 Thread Richard Stupek
A question on GBUDB utilization. I show a current utilization of 95% (from the log file) which I assume means the amount of memory used from what is set aside for gbudb entries. Is that correct? What happens when more entries are added? Does the GBUdb grow or does it get pruned out? Will

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-17 Thread Pete McNeil
Richard Stupek wrote: A question on GBUDB utilization. I show a current utilization of 95% (from the log file) which I assume means the amount of memory used from what is set aside for gbudb entries. Is that correct? Yes. What happens when more entries are added? Does the GBUdb grow or

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-17 Thread Richard Stupek
Thanks for the info. Is there any diagnostic information available when a gbudb sync occurs? On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Pete McNeil madscient...@armresearch.comwrote: Richard Stupek wrote: A question on GBUDB utilization. I show a current utilization of 95% (from the log file) which

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-17 Thread Pete McNeil
Richard Stupek wrote: Thanks for the info. Is there any diagnostic information available when a gbudb sync occurs? You can always see the current status of GBUdb in your status.* files. If you append these logs you can follow the state of the system through time using pre-compiled statistics

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-17 Thread Richard Stupek
A question about using the XCI bad command. Assume an email passes through sniffer and does not trigger any rules, I then run it through and determine it is in fact spam. I send a bad command to let sniffer know the IP address had a bad event. Won't the good event that would occur due the spam

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-13 Thread Pete McNeil
Richard Stupek wrote: Which of the 2 scan commands should we use to scan a message? Does sending the IP address help improve scanning? snfxciscannerscan file='filepath'//scanner/xci/snf OR snfxciscannerscan file='filepath' xhdr='no' log='no' ip='12.34.56.78'//scanner/xci/snf That depends on

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-13 Thread Richard Stupek
So there would not be a real benefit to passing the IP over when it is the is already in the mail having been added by the mail server? On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Pete McNeil madscient...@armresearch.comwrote: Richard Stupek wrote: Which of the 2 scan commands should we use to scan a

[sniffer] Re: xci scanner command

2009-02-13 Thread Pete McNeil
Richard Stupek wrote: So there would not be a real benefit to passing the IP over when it is the is already in the mail having been added by the mail server? Correct. The vast majority of the time a properly configured SNF + GBUdb can learn the original source of the IP even if you have