Please ignore this test.#
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
Sorry for all these tests -- but a new copy of Declude Interceptor seems to
want to completely lose messages from lists.
Rob
#
This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
the mailing list .
To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <
Message received...
Sharon
Portage College
|-+-->
| | Pete McNeil|
| | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]|
| | search.com>|
| | Sent by: |
| | <[EMAIL PROTEC
pong...
Pete McNeil wrote:
Hello sniffer,
Just testing.
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
Got it but was not marked with [sniffer] in the subject line
Goran Jovanovic
Omega Network Solutions
> -Original Message-
> From: sniffer@sortmonster.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
> Of Pete McNeil
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 1:12 AM
> To: sniffer@sortmonster.com
> Subject: Tes
Pong
John T
eServices For You
"Seek, and ye shall find!"
> -Original Message-
> From: sniffer@sortmonster.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Pete
> McNeil
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 10:12 PM
> To: sniffer@sortmonster.com
> Subject: Test
>
> Hello sniffer,
>
> Just testing.
Ping?
Pong.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert
MathiasSent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 3:59 PMTo:
sniffer@SortMonster.comSubject: [sniffer] Test
Apologies, but need
to test.
Robert
Apologies, but need to test.
Robert
Hi,
Is there a test sender where I can have the program
send us a test mail that should fail a specific sniffer test?
I know I can test sniffer itself agains a single
good and bad file, but I want to test the chain. The Declude site has something
like that where it is sending the EICAR
been triggered.
Andrew
8)
-Original Message-From: Bonno Bloksma
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 1:26
PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [sniffer] test
sender
Hi,
Is there a test sender where I can have the
program send us a test mail that s
On Friday, December 10, 2004, 4:25:50 PM, Bonno wrote:
BB> Hi,
BB>
BB> Is there a test sender where I can have the program send us
BB> a test mail that should fail a specific sniffer test?
BB>
BB> I know I can test sniffer itself agains a single good and
BB> bad file, b
thanks for sharing
- Original Message -
From: "Landry William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 4:05 AM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Test ordering/precedence
Here's what my Sniffer global.cfg entries for look like:
SNIFFER-
On Friday, December 3, 2004, 8:53:26 AM, Joe wrote:
JW> OK, I'm confused. First I admit I don't spend much time on Sniffer or
JW> Declude settings, and I haven't learned the programs very well.
JW> I used the default Sniffer config files. If I changed as indicated below
JW> will it catch more S
eed some advice.
Thanks,
Joe
- Original Message -
From: "Landry William" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 10:05 PM
Subject: RE: [sniffer] Test ordering/precedence
Here's what my Sniffer global.cfg entries for look like:
SN
Hi Pete,
The false positive rates for all of these rule groups have fallen
dramatically over the past 8 months and at this point they are all
comparable. Different systems see different rates, but all rates are
low.
Yup, I used to rate the sixties series different in declude but I have
stopped to
You will need to use your LicenseID and AuthCode, and want to adjust the
weights to meet your own needs and requirements.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Serge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 6:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:[sniffer] Test ordering/precede
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 9:59 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [sniffer] Test ordering/precedence
On Thursday, December 2, 2004, 4:15:43 PM, Jim wrote:
JM> Pete,
JM> We have rules setup in declude based upon sniffer return codes 60 and
62 to
JM> mark all messages with those tests as spam, ho
On Thursday, December 2, 2004, 4:15:43 PM, Jim wrote:
JM> Pete,
JM> We have rules setup in declude based upon sniffer return codes 60 and 62 to
JM> mark all messages with those tests as spam, however we do not have any 61 or
JM> 62 return codes setup. Can you briefly explain what each of these gr
.
Computer Tech2, CCNA
Nez Perce Tribe
Information Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Pete McNeil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 11:31 AM
Subject: [sniffer] Test ordering/precedence
Hello Sniffer Fol
Hello Sniffer Folks,
During a previous discussion in late September, it was generally
agreed that it was time to re-order the priority of the experimental
and generalized rule groups.
I am going to begin that work today.
The new ordering will be:
63: Experimental Received [IP]
62:
Pete McNeil wrote:
M> SNIFFER-EXPERIMENTAL...23.32%
M> SNIFFER-IP...9.70%
M> SNIFFER-OBFUSCATION...2.02%
M> SNIFFER-GENERAL.1.64%
I must be tired, but I don't understand these numbers in this context.
What are the perce
-Original Message-
From: Pete McNeil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've actually been thinking very strongly of reorganizing the rule group IDs
recently. Especially in light of the new changes we've made with robots et
al. The accuracy of the Experimental IP group has gone up considerably -
On Saturday, September 18, 2004, 11:22:02 PM, Matt wrote:
M> Thanks Pete, but let me just stress the largest issue that I see and I
M> think you already are aware of it. The new IP classification is the
M> most likely to produce false positives and it's result code of 60 places
M> precedence of t
Thanks Pete, but let me just stress the largest issue that I see and I
think you already are aware of it. The new IP classification is the
most likely to produce false positives and it's result code of 60 places
precedence of that over General, Experimental and Obfuscation hits.
There is a la
On Saturday, September 18, 2004, 9:07:55 PM, Matt wrote:
M> John,
M> If you read this more carefully, I was not suggesting that
M> action betaken that would affect everyone's system in such a way
M> that it wouldrequire modifications. The 60 result code was
M> recently changed fromGray rules to
ehalf Of Matt
Sent: Saturday,
September 18, 2004 5:28
PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [sniffer]
Test
ordering/precedence
Pete,
Given some of the recent changes in the result codes for Sniffer, I
thought I
would inquire about the precedence of the result codes and how these
can affect
s
.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:28 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [sniffer] Test
ordering/precedence
Pete,
Given some of
Pete,
Given some of the recent changes in the result codes for Sniffer, I
thought I would inquire about the precedence of the result codes and
how these can affect systems.
On my system I have weighted the result codes differently and overall,
I would consider the following order to be sugges
We have done everything the mailing has been saying, and we have 1.79, and
we catch about 3 viruses per day, but we know that our customers are still
receiving 30 to 40 of these per day or more. Is there anything that can be
done in our configuration that is sent to us every night to rid us of th
this
problem?
Eddie Arrants
Cape Lookout Internet Services
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 8:46 PM
To: Richard Farris; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
>This may have been aswe
This may have been aswered before but what do we do with the emails coming
in and getting by the filter with .zip files that look like a virus...I have
Declude 1.79 installeddo I have to go as far as to exclude all .zip
files?
Not quite. You need to ban all encrypted .ZIP files (since no AV p
Tech Support
- Original Message -
From: "Pete McNeil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
> At 04:17 PM 5/4/2004, you wrote:
> >At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
> >
> &
At 04:17 PM 5/4/2004, you wrote:
At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
Every rulebase is potentially a different size & composition, plus sizes
typically change with each update. I'm glad to hear all the positive
reports on this. :-)
Forgive me...
At 02:49 PM 5/4/2004, Vivek Khera wrote:
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
Every rulebase is potentially a different size & composition, plus sizes
typically change with each update. I'm glad to hear all the positive
reports on this. :-)
Forgive me... What is the URL for the zipped
On May 4, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Pete McNeil wrote:
Every rulebase is potentially a different size & composition, plus
sizes typically change with each update. I'm glad to hear all the
positive reports on this. :-)
I updated my perl program that does fail-safe (at least on unix-like
systems) fetch t
byte than to 1:
12:24:17 (78.89 KB/s) - `sniffer2.new.gz' saved [1983539/1983539]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
mod_gzip is now configu
il 30, 2004 8:48 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
mod_gzip is now configured on our web server to handle .snf files. This
means that if your download mechanism is capable of accepting gzip encoding
then you can get your .snf file from the web server for less than 1Mbyte
typi
Appears to work beautifully.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Pete McNeil
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 12:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sniffer] test
At 07:13 AM 5/1/2004, you wrote:
> > This can be done with wget, for e
At 07:13 AM 5/1/2004, you wrote:
> This can be done with wget, for example, but setting this up appears to be
> technically complex - so I'm going to leave it at that for now. (Requires
> the --header switch and piping the output through gzip)
It is not so complex:
In the wget command change
-O s
> This can be done with wget, for example, but setting this up appears to be
> technically complex - so I'm going to leave it at that for now. (Requires
> the --header switch and piping the output through gzip)
It is not so complex:
In the wget command change
-O sniffer.new
to
-O sniffer.new.
I guess things have been pretty quiet.
Here's a tiny update that might liven things up.
mod_gzip is now configured on our web server to handle .snf files. This
means that if your download mechanism is capable of accepting gzip encoding
then you can get your .snf file from the web server for less
just a test
This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and
(un)subscription instructions go to
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
004 1:42 PM
Subject: [sniffer] Test
I'm seeing header corruption today on this group, just a test message..
Frederic Tarasevicius
Internet Information Services, Inc.
http://www.i-is.com/
810-794-4400
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Didn't happen this time, nevermind!
Frederic TaraseviciusInternet Information Services, Inc.http://www.i-is.com/810-794-4400mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From:
Fred
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2004 1:42
PM
Subject: [sniffer]
I'm seeing header corruption today on this group, just a test
message..
Frederic TaraseviciusInternet Information Services, Inc.http://www.i-is.com/810-794-4400mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
test
This E-Mail came from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
46 matches
Mail list logo
