RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Madscientist
Scott should back me up or correct me on this. I think that you can configure multiple test lines using Message Sniffer where each line looks for a specific return value instead of nonzero. Something like the following... SNIFFERSPAM external 63 SNIFFERSCUM external 62 Note the 63 and 6

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Mike Nice
How can we catch symbol 62 differently? V2 is configured as 'nonzero', meaning that all return codes other than zero are logged and treated alike by Declude. - Original Message - From: "Madscientist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings > Sniffer ver

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Madscientist
Message Sniffer Version 2 has been officially released. _M | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of | Sheldon Koehler | Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:01 PM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greeti

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Sheldon Koehler
> Sniffer version 2 is out now. Scumware rules have a special symbol 62. > You could look for that specific result code and treat it specially. > Currently all other spam rules are coded to the "generic" group with a > symbol of 63. Is this still in beta? I will have to take a closer look at it to

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Madscientist
Sniffer version 2 is out now. Scumware rules have a special symbol 62. You could look for that specific result code and treat it specially. Currently all other spam rules are coded to the "generic" group with a symbol of 63. That should make it simpler. Hope this helps, _M | -Original Messa

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: The Spam Battle 2002: A Tactical Update

2002-12-04 Thread Sheldon Koehler
> An excellent article for mail admins... > > http://rr.sans.org/email/spam_battle.php Thanks!!! I now have a new tagline signiture... Sheldon Sheldon Koehler, Owner/Partnerhttp://www.tenforward.com Ten Forward Communications 360-457-9023 Nationwide access, neighborhood supp

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Filtering E-Greetings

2002-12-04 Thread Sheldon Koehler
Since we have to use Sniffer as a weighted test and these are only failing the Sniffer test, how can I safely block these greetings? We have too high of a volume to hold email as it would take a full time staff person to just search the rejects, so we are forced to delete. Sheldon Sheldon Koeh

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Black list domain

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Good question, I was seeing the same thing, but I don't believe wildcards work here. Hope I'm wrong. Scott? No, it isn't possible to use wildcards. However, given how many people have been requesting more comprehensive filtering abilities, it's something that we may work on.

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Black list domain

2002-12-04 Thread paul
Title: Black list domain Good question, I was seeing the same thing, but I don't believe wildcards work here. Hope I'm wrong. Scott?   Paul - Original Message - From: Harry Vanderzand To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 5:11 PM Subject

[Declude.JunkMail] OT: The Spam Battle 2002: A Tactical Update

2002-12-04 Thread Patrick Childers
An excellent article for mail admins... http://rr.sans.org/email/spam_battle.php --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude/McAfee] --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscri

[Declude.JunkMail] Black list domain

2002-12-04 Thread Harry Vanderzand
Title: Black list domain Hi I am getting a lot of Spam from domains like: @listsend4586.com  The spammers tend to use a lot of variation of the same domain by varying the numbers. I know I can blacklist .domain.com Can I blacklist @listsend*.com where * can be anything? Hope I made se

Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] false positives

2002-12-04 Thread Sanford Whiteman
> Since I have been using the ROUTETO command, can I somehow forward > the message to the intended recipient... Yes, The Bat! does this readily. > ...without the user realizing I monitored it? Not in a commercial MUA that I'm aware of, since they add headers that traced the message route. The

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] change HOLD location

2002-12-04 Thread Sanford Whiteman
> Is there a way to change the location of HOLD messages from the > default? You can use an NTFS mount point to put it on another physical partition, though it's still just one folder. -Sandy --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- T

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] false positives

2002-12-04 Thread Ron Harris
Can you recommend an e-mail client to read mail and redirect it to the proper recipient? I'll look into the Imail Client. Ron -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 12:59 PM To: [EMAIL

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] false positives

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
I use the ROUTETO command and I view them through web messaging. Should I view them another way? That's up to you -- using the ROUTETO action, they are treated as regular E-mail, and the methods of handling them are based solely on the type of mail client you are using. Since I have been us

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] false positives

2002-12-04 Thread Ron Harris
I use the ROUTETO command and I view them through web messaging. Should I view them another way? Since I have been using the ROUTETO command, can I somehow forward the message to the intended recipient without the user realizing I monitored it? If I were to start using the HOLD command, how woul

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude catching emails with a WEIGHT10

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Perhaps someone can shed some light on this. I've got junkMail running using a weight system. If an email gets a weight of less that 18 it is passed on to the receipient. Today however, I'm getting legit emails from a particular client that is being caught and forwarded to my catchall account as

[Declude.JunkMail] Declude catching emails with a WEIGHT10

2002-12-04 Thread Troy Hilton
Hello All, Perhaps someone can shed some light on this. I've got junkMail running using a weight system. If an email gets a weight of less that 18 it is passed on to the receipient. Today however, I'm getting legit emails from a particular client that is being caught and forwarded to my catchall a

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OSRELAY: What a pain

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
So here is the deal: we have an IP address that is list/or reported (who knows) with OSRELAY (http://relays.osirusoft.com/) as an open relay. Me and another engineer have been on site trying to figure out how to de-list this IP address. You can de-list it by making sure that it is no longer an

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] change HOLD location

2002-12-04 Thread andyb
That is a bummer, I'm using xcopy to backup files from one computer to another, and the hold directly can have as many as 3000 messages over the weekend (which is big plug for the effectiveness of declude) thanks, andy - Original Message - From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] change HOLD location

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is there a way to change the location of HOLD messages from the default? No, there isn't, but that is something we are planning to change. -Scott --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail m

[Declude.JunkMail] change HOLD location

2002-12-04 Thread andyb
Is there a way to change the location of HOLD messages from the default? Thanks, andrew --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and

[Declude.JunkMail] OSRELAY: What a pain

2002-12-04 Thread Mishi Saravi
Good morning all, In advance I would like to apologize for posting this email but my purpose of this email are accomplishing two things: 1. Us internet technologist to be motivated to communicate in human language 2. Ask the experts or troopers who dealt with this issue and share their inputs So

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weight10 test not tripped

2002-12-04 Thread steve
Scott, In the headers. No whitelists, no weight changes. I've included the headers below. Also, attached is the global.cfg file Thanks for your help, Steve Received: from bellsouth.net [200.168.14.67] by mail.tmlp.com (SMTPD32-7.06) id ACE418F100DA; Wed, 04 Dec 2002 05:45:56 -0500 Received: f

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weight10 test not tripped

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
In the headers. No whitelists, no weight changes. I've included the headers below. Also, attached is the global.cfg file The problem here is that the weight of the E-mail isn't greater than 10. The line: IPNOTINMX ipnotinmx x x 0 -4 will give an E-mail

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Weight10 test not tripped

2002-12-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
I'm a relatively new user of JunkMail. I've recently seem several emails fail the following combinations of tests yet not trip the Weight10 test: NOPOSTMASTER, BASE64 and ROUTING HELOBOGUS, REVDNS BADHEADERS, SPAMHEADERS Anyone else have similar experiences...what could I do (if anything) t

[Declude.JunkMail] Weight10 test not tripped

2002-12-04 Thread steve
Folks, I'm a relatively new user of JunkMail. I've recently seem several emails fail the following combinations of tests yet not trip the Weight10 test: NOPOSTMASTER, BASE64 and ROUTING HELOBOGUS, REVDNS BADHEADERS, SPAMHEADERS Anyone else have similar experiences...what could I do (if anyth

[Declude.JunkMail] more on spamcop

2002-12-04 Thread Smart Business Lists
My latest incident with spamcop - A client has an Order Confirmation auto-responder. To get the message you have to send an e-mail to the auto-responder. The auto-responder is not on our server - only the web site. The auto-responder message was reported to spamcop. We think it was

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] E - G r e e t i n g s Posts

2002-12-04 Thread Kami Razvan
Hi; You are right... This actually is the first time this has happened. Our weighing system is such that a score of 100+ is assigned to our Spam trap accounts. In almost 1 year this is the first time I am faced with this... Never thought a legitimate eMail could trigger so many traps. Of course