RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Tagging a mail if its weighted as spam
> > No. You can't have multiple actions per test -- to do what > you want, you > would need to create a new test, such as WEIGHT10A, that is > identical to > the WEIGHT10 test (except fort the name). Then you could have: > > WEIGHT10SUBJECT [Spam] > WEIGHT10AHEADER [This E-mail is likely to be spam; see > http://www.example.com/spam for details] > > and both actions will work together for E-mail that fails the > WEIGHT10 test. > Thanks --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Tagging a mail if its weighted as spam
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. > Scott Perry > Sent: 21. juli 2004 13:00 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Tagging a mail if its weighted as spam > > > >I know it's possible to do this in subject line but I wonder if its > >possible to add a line or two in the start of the mail. with a > >link ot a FAQ of why its marked as spam. > > Yes -- you can use the HEADER action to do that. For example: > > WEIGHT10HEADER [This E-mail is likely to be spam; see > http://www.example.com/spam for details] > so this WEIGHT10SUBJECT [Spam] WEIGHT10HEADER [This E-mail is likely to be spam; see http://www.example.com/spam for details] will put a subject line and a header ? --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] Tagging a mail if its weighted as spam
Hi I know it's possible to do this in subject line but I wonder if its possible to add a line or two in the start of the mail. with a link ot a FAQ of why its marked as spam. Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] maybe a silly question
> > In this case, E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (I'm assuming you > don't own the > domain.com domain :-) would loved to own that but no I am not -- the RFCs request that people use example.com for > examples) will use the settings in the > \IMail\Declude\example.com\$default$.JunkMail file. > Ok that answer the question > >we will put for weight 25 a SPAM mark in the header for all > domains on the > >server but for thoe having a special setting saying that > >those mail shall be deleted og something else or other test > should be run. > >The question still is which declude.junkmail file does it > >check first is it the one in declude folder or the one en the folder > >domain.com > > If the E-mail only has one recipient, only one config file > will be used > (\IMail\Declude\example.com\$default$.JunkMail in this case). > ok so cc and bcc will use the other one if they are not in the domain Thanks --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] maybe a silly question
> Neither runs first. The actions are handled after all the tests are > run. Declude JunkMail then goes through each recipient, and > handles the > actions for all the tests failed for each recipient. > > If the first recipient is a local user, and the second one is > a remote > user, the local user's settings will be applied first. If the first > recipient is a remote user and the second one is a local > user, the remote > user's settings will be applied first. > > -Scott hmm ok domain.com is on local server running the tests domain.com has also per domain settings that differs for the test running for all the domains on the same server we will put for weight 25 a SPAM mark in the header for all domains on the server but for thoe having a special setting saying that those mail shall be deleted og something else or other test should be run. The question still is which declude.junkmail file does it check first is it the one in declude folder or the one en the folder domain.com --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] maybe a silly question
> > The global.cfg file is used for outgoing E-mail, whereas the > per-domain > settings are used for incoming E-mail, so this would only be > an issue if an > E-mail was sent to one of the per-domain domains *and* an external > user. In this case, "[ spam ]" would be added to the > subject, and any > actions for the per-domain domain would be used as well. > > In the case of multiple SUBJECT actions, only one will be > used (either the > first or last, per the order they are listed in the global.cfg file). > hmm ok but which run first ? the default junkmail file or the per domain? --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] maybe a silly question
Hi If i put a [ spam ] marking i subject line at a certain weight level in the global.cfg how will this interrupt with the per domain settings? Which wil run first Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] I'm going to be away next week
> Does that mean we can approve feature requests that we know > you'd like? ;) > > Enjoy your time away from us, > Greg As long as he does not say otherwise it must be so :-) Damm so many new features we can get here hehehehehe --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop
Title: Message Spamcop is NOT ever reliable for deleting spam, as one of several tests its ok but never ever based on them alone. An example. The largest broadband company here in Norway tries to force all there customers to use there mailservers as SMTP, they ended up on Spamcop's list in 72 hours. Most mail came through but a lot of people lost mail because of idiots using spamcop as a test for deleting mail. Benny From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shayne EmbrySent: 28. april 2004 16:34To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop John, I didn't say that. In my case I haven't received any legitimate email from those domains and I do receive a considerable amount of spam from them, so I tend to treat them accordingly. To answer the original question, in my case SpamCop is very, very effective and I use it aggressively. I rarely see a false positive. But as I said, everyone has different needs. I'm not trying to disagree with anyone posting here about their experiences and practices. Just relaying my experience. Shayne -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists)Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 9:07 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is SpamCop So, if I sent you a message from my home ISP account, which is Adelphia, you would automatically consider it spam? John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shayne EmbrySent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 6:46 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop Personally, I don't consider this a problem with SpamCop. I understand that different people have different needs, but in my case every message entering my system from adelphia.net and wanadoo.fr is spam. Shayne -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MattSent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:21 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] How accurate is spamcop SpamCop has a serious problem with blacklisting large ISP mail servers. Just yesterday I had three false positives partially caused by SpamCop weighted at about 45% of my hold weight for the domains in question, and hitting E-mail coming from adelphia.net, wanadoo.fr and netvision.net.il, all large ISP mail servers. Based on my review of SpamCop on these ISP mail servers, I estimate that they have between a 1 in 20 and a 1 in 50 chance of a message getting improperly tagged when they come through such an ISP. This also caries over to the likes of AOL and Road Runner.I once contacted one of their "Deputies" about the issue and their response was that "SpamCop is aggressive." Unfortunately their failure to resolve this long-standing problem of treating an ISP mail server that sends 99.99% legit E-mail just the same as a mail server belonging to a spam house weakens the value of their blacklist a great deal and causes administrators like ourselves a lot of frustration that something so obvious couldn't be corrected.SpamCop also has a fundamental flaw in that submitted spam that gets forwarded from one server to a destination often causes the forwarding server to get tagged, and forged headers can also trick them from time to time.I would suggest weighting SpamCop at no more than 60% of your hold weight, and add as many reliable tests as possible. SpamCop is however a very important test, and it accurately flags about 2/3 of the spam reaching my server.MattDoris Dean wrote: Is it safe to simply delete an email flagged with spamcop? TIA Doris -- =MailPure custom filters for Declude JunkMail Pro.http://www.mailpure.com/software/=
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification to customers of change of ownership
I am cloce to agree with you but as one of those who is tired of Imail and the high cost on hardware needed to handle mail per customer comparing to Linux systems I would loved to have declude on linux with postfix fex. Declude is the only thing keeping me on Imail. Benny > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt > Sent: 13. april 2004 07:16 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Notification to customers of > change of ownership > > Scott, > > While I respect open source, I think the greater market > opportunity for > a for profit gateway product is on Windows based servers > using MS SMTP. > For one, it would probably allow your current base of IMail users to > make use of it on the same server if they had a port > forwarding firewall > to handle SMTP AUTH (or you could also configure the gateway > to do the > AUTH for them and do away with the need for port forwarding), > but more > importantly, there is a large market of Exchange and MDaemon > servers out > there that could also make use of the product, and hopefully > marry the > capabilities into as few different sets of code as possible. > Businesses > that pay for their mail server software are much more likely > to pay for > their spam and virus blocking software as well, while those > using things > like Postfix are more likely to go the SpamAssassin/open > source route. > Although Windows costs money as a platform, so do extra servers and > extra rack space (and extra servers to support). So having a single > box-solution would be better than a multiple box solution > except in very > large installations where provisioning is already a practical > reality. > I would be surprised to see a good business case for any > other platform > offering the most potential unless you were planing on > creating your own > SMTP engine, though I'm sure that individually we may have many > different needs that don't fit one generalized mold. From > what I have > seen with VAMSoft's ORF, you should be able to access all the > data used > with IMail except for alias resolution, with the obvious > caveat that the > account list would need to be exported (which could be done with a > simple tool), or maybe you could build the hooks in as you do now. > > Another suggestion might be to simplify the code base by marrying the > capabilities across versions and providing different levels according > the number of accounts similar to how IMail does their > licensing. This > probably roughly matches the breakdown of your service > currently, with > heavier users opting for the more expensive options. My > concern here is > more so the speed of the introduction of new features and bug > fixes, and > the more platforms that you support along with the options available > according to the version might make such things more difficult to > maintain. This would also lessen the support and > documentation needed > according to the current forms of differentiation among > versions. From > a business perspective, this might provide better cost > justification for > lower volume users that seek out more advanced capabilities, and this > group represents the majority of mail servers out there and plenty of > business opportunity. And to keep this from impacting the > smaller group > of current users that this could impact negatively (charging more > according to volume and not capabilities), you might want to > think about > grand fathering them in to a modified licensing scheme. > > Just thought I would mention these things since I'm sure you are > actively thinking about alternatives right now. > > Matt > > R. Scott Perry wrote: > > > > >> Have you already started considering which other MTA's you > will try to > >> integrate with? > > > > > > No decisions have been made yet, but it looks like a > gateway product > > (which would be compatible with all SMTP servers) may be > the way that > > we go. > > > >> I want to suggest Xmail Server > (http://www.xmailserver.org). I have > >> looked at making Declude work with it > >> before, but never found the time to write the middleware > needed. I like > >> Xmail for it's speed and configurability, and the next > release will add > >> integrated IMAP finally. I also like the suggestion of MS SMTP > >> service, but > >> either dealing with sinks used in MS SMTP is very difficult or > >> developers > >> think admins are suckers, I have never seen a cheap addin for MS > >> SMTP, even > >> simple ones. Of course, feel free to correct me if they do exist. > > > > > > Thanks for the suggestions -- we will take a note of this. > > > >> Another question, will there be any consideration in making Declude > >> multi-platform? > > > > > > It is something that we are giving serious thought to. At > this point, > > it isn't a high priority -- but something that is be
RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT zip from command prompt
the unix tools did the trick > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Terry Fritts > Sent: 15. januar 2004 15:18 > To: Hosting Support > Subject: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] OT zip from command prompt > > From my own experience PKZIP (the new one) is much faster than > anything else I've used. > > Also, with PKZIP I was actually able to pipe very large log files from > perl to pkzip command line and it not only kept up but did an > exceptional job. Only way I could really handle really large files. > > If your machines are in a network and you can access them > programmatically then maybe you can get by with fewer copies of pkzip. > I grab log files from all my network machines via a program on a > central server. > > If you need absolutely free then you could use Perl on each machine > and use the zip library from within perl. Or you can do same thing > with PowerBasic for instance and one of the free ZLIB libraries. > > hope you find your best solution > > Terry Fritts > > > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] OT zip from command prompt
Yes i know but i hvae to distribute this on 150 boxes and that is a lot of licenses :-) so free or nearly free are the keyword here > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > DLAnalyzer Support > Sent: 15. januar 2004 14:37 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT zip from command prompt > > Winzip has a command line utility add in. > > Darrell > > > ISPhuset Nordic AS writes: > > > Hi a little off topic > > > > Anyone knowing off a free or nearly free zip utility which > can pack some files to a zip archive. > > > > unpacking isn't a problem > > > > It is a must that it can run for a command prompt > > > > Benny > > > > --- > > [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 > > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > > > > > Check Out DLAnalyzer a comprehensive reporting tool for > Declude Junkmail Logs - http://www.dlanalyzer.com > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] OT zip from command prompt
Hi a little off topic Anyone knowing off a free or nearly free zip utility which can pack some files to a zip archive. unpacking isn't a problem It is a must that it can run for a command prompt Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements
but for an example Received: from mailgw1.mailserveren.com [213.236.237.228] by mailserveren.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-7.13) id AFA214230116; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:13:22 +0100 Received: from mail.fluidhosting.com (mail.fluidhosting.com [66.150.201.72]) by mailgw1.mailserveren.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 71EAA33AA9 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:21:23 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 33459 invoked by uid 110); 25 Nov 2003 16:19:06 - Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "DLAnalyzer Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: DLAnalyzer - Enterprise Trial License Key Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:19:05 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_0_33455_1069777145"; charset="iso-8859-1" X-RBL-Warning: ROUTING: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [210f]. X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [66.150.201.72] X-Note: This E-mail was scanned by Declude JunkMail (www.declude.com) for spam. X-Spam-Tests-Failed: ROUTING [1] X-RCPT-TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Status: U X-UIDL: 359245240 > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt > Sent: 25. november 2003 17:56 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements > > > Hi, > > How is your "ROUTING" test defined in your GLOBAL.CFG? Is that the > 'SPAMROUTING' test? If so - yes, 42% seems extremely high. > > >> but how to find more info about route problem << > > You should look into the headers of some of the emails that > fail the "ROUTE" > test. If you can't tell why they failed the ROUTE test, then > post one here > for us to inspect. > > One immediate thought is - do you have a BACKUP MX? Did you > identify that > BACKUP MX to Declude, so that it knows to "skip" the header > for your BACKUP > MX. If (by chance), your BACKUP MX uses an IP range assigned > to a different > country, that alone may account for your high ROUTE failures. > > Best Regards > Andy Schmidt > > H&M Systems Software, Inc. > 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 > Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 > > Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) > Fax:+1 201 934-9206 > > http://www.HM-Software.com/ > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements
So you say that i should take it out ? > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. > Scott Perry > Sent: 25. november 2003 18:07 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements > > > >Isn't this a faily high amount of routing failure ? > > Note that the ROUTING test is designed for mailservers in > North America -- > if your mailserver is located outside of North America, it > will not work as > well. > > -Scott > --- > Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail > mailservers. > Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver > vulnerability detection. > Find out what you've been missing: Ask about our free 30-day > evaluation. > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements
IPBYPASS193.217.93.5 an extern server forwarding mail IPBYPASS213.236.237.186 a mail gateway local IPBYPASS213.236.237.163 a mail server local sending trough 186 IPBYPASS213.236.237.227 a mail server local sending trough 186 IPBYPASS213.236.237.228 a mail gateway local IPBYPASS213.236.237.229 a mail gateway local WHITELIST HABEAS WHITELIST IP 213.236.237.151 WHITELIST IP 213.236.237.141 ROUTING spamrouting x x 4 0 since i dont have a mail to copy the header from Benny > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt > Sent: 25. november 2003 17:56 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements > > > Hi, > > How is your "ROUTING" test defined in your GLOBAL.CFG? Is that the > 'SPAMROUTING' test? If so - yes, 42% seems extremely high. > > >> but how to find more info about route problem << > > You should look into the headers of some of the emails that > fail the "ROUTE" > test. If you can't tell why they failed the ROUTE test, then > post one here > for us to inspect. > > One immediate thought is - do you have a BACKUP MX? Did you > identify that > BACKUP MX to Declude, so that it knows to "skip" the header > for your BACKUP > MX. If (by chance), your BACKUP MX uses an IP range assigned > to a different > country, that alone may account for your high ROUTE failures. > > Best Regards > Andy Schmidt > > H&M Systems Software, Inc. > 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 > Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 > > Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) > Fax:+1 201 934-9206 > > http://www.HM-Software.com/ > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements
yeah yeah but how to find more info about route problem Isn't this a faily high amount of routing failure ? Report Start Time: 11.25.2003 00:00:00 Report End Time: 11.25.2003 23:59:59 Total Messages: 28 149 Messages That Failed: 19 519 Spam Percentage: 69,34% TEST # FAILED Percentage ROUTING11 843...42,07% WEIGHT109 927...35,27% WEIGHT157 226...25,67% SPAMCOP.6 758...24,01% WEIGHT205 243...18,63% NOABUSE.5 196...18,46% REVDNS..4 890...17,37% DSBL4 465...15,86% HELOBOGUS...4 307...15,30% EASYNET-DNSBL...4 101...14,57% NOPOSTMASTER3 991...14,18% BADHEADERS..3 665...13,02% EASYNET-PROXIES.2 0577,31% SORBS-SOCKS.1 3444,77% BASE64..1 2494,44% SORBS-SPAM..1 1654,14% SORBS-HTTP..1 1644,14% DSN...8453,00% SPAMHEADERS...7672,72% BLITZEDALL3381,20% MAILFROM..3201,14% SORBS-MISC1530,54% ORDB...590,21% BONDEDSENDER...400,14% SORBS-ZOMBIE...120,04% SORBS-SMTP..80,03% PERCENT.20,01% SORBS-WEB...10,00% > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt > Sent: 25. november 2003 16:53 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements > > > Hi, > > >> Where can i find this versjon of DLAnalyzer(v2.0.B.I) << > > Amazingly enough at: > http://www.dlanalyzer.com > > > > Best Regards > Andy > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements
Where can i find this versjon of DLAnalyzer(v2.0.B.I) > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Schmidt > Sent: 25. november 2003 16:13 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] EasyNet Replacements > > > Well, > > Here is how my replacement tests are doing (turned off > EasyNet at noon): > > DLAnalyzer(v2.0.B.I) Report Generated At 11/25/2003 12:19:41 AM For > Argos.net > Report Start Time: 11/24/2003 00:00:00 > Report End Time: 11/24/2003 23:59:59 > Total Messages: 12,777 > Messages That Failed: 8,475 > Spam Percentage: 66.33% > > TEST # FAILED Percentage > > AHBL..7555.91% > AHBLDOMAINS630.49% > AHBLEXEMPT.310.24% > AHBLPROXIES...4683.66% > AHBLSOURCES...2912.28% > > NJABL...2,317...18.13% > NJABLDUL..2021.58% > NJABLPROXIES1,370...10.72% > NJABLRELAYS...1090.85% > NJABLSOURCES..2552.00% > > SORBS...2,199...17.21% > SORBS-DUL...1,578...12.35% > SORBS-HTTP5124.01% > SORBS-MISC.690.54% > SORBS-SMTP.110.09% > SORBS-SOCKS...6164.82% > SORBS-SPAM2652.07% > SORBS-ZOMBIE...150.12% > > EASYNET-DNSBL...1,1579.06% > EASYNET-DOMAINS...2501.96% > EASYNET-DYNA1,409...11.03% > EASYNET-PROXIES...7826.12% > > BLITZEDALL2762.16% > BONDEDSENDER..1881.47% > CBL.3,179...24.88% > DSBL3,530...27.63% > DSBLMULTI..710.56% > KUNDENSERVER...120.09% > MAILPOLICE-PORN310.24% > ORDB...770.60% > SPAMCOP.4,028...31.53% > SPAMHAUS..7966.23% > > RDNSBL1791.40% > > BADHEADERS..2,224...17.41% > BASE644713.69% > BCC4...690.54% > BCC6...410.32% > BCC8...290.23% > COMMENTS..5364.20% > HELOBOGUS...1,963...15.36% > MAILFROM..2051.60% > REVDNS..1,701...13.31% > SPAMDOMAINS.1,612...12.62% > SPAMHEADERS.1,329...10.40% > SPAMROUTING...9627.53% > > > Best Regards > Andy Schmidt > > H&M Systems Software, Inc. > 600 East Crescent Avenue, Suite 203 > Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458-1846 > > Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) > Fax:+1 201 934-9206 > > http://www.HM-Software.com/ > > > --- > [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 > type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > at http://www.mail-archive.com. > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] CAN-SPAM
What effect will this have on the endless work we are doing on here fighting spam ? Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail
For now just those in russian -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: 29. september 2003 18:03 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail >so if it contains scandianvian letters it will also cached Yes. The NONENGLISH test is designed to catch E-mail with subjects that are not in English. It isn't 100% accurate, and isn't appropriate for many of our customers. But for people who know that they won't be getting E-mail in languages other than English, it's quite accurate. >isn't there any other way to block this crap You'll need to be more specific. Are you looking to filter on the subject? That should work fine. Or are you looking to detect just E-mails that are in Russian? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you've been missing: Ask about our free 30-day evaluation. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail
so if it contains scandianvian letters it will also cached isn't there any other way to block this crap -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: 18. september 2003 22:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail >Here are the headers from this specific e-mail that I wrote about. > >Subject: Êðàñíàÿ è ÷åðíàÿ èêðà... The NONENGLISH test should catch this one. -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers. Declude Virus: Catches known viruses and is the leader in mailserver vulnerability detection. Find out what you've been missing: Ask about our free 30-day evaluation. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail
Anyone found a way to stop this ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew Sent: 18. september 2003 19:33 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail And here's a nasty Babelfish translation: Is for sure for you necessary angliiskiy language in the work or in the contact on leisure. It occurs, to learn foreign language is possible very easily and it is rapid! For this it suffices to only use our special procedure! You ring, contact telephone in Moscow: 1-0-5-5-1-8-6 -Original Message- From: Colbeck, Andrew Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:09 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Foreign language Spam Mail >>Who has had any luck in trapping spam written in a foreign language. I >>seem to be getting what appears to be spam from what appear to be >>written in Russian and I have no clue has to how to stop the messages. >Could you send the full headers of one of the E-mails? The actual foreign >language content isn't as important as what appears in the headers. Here's a whole message. I don't stop any mail just because of the character set; but I was quite succesfull against this guy. This morning we received this handcrafted obfuscated e-mail which also used an ISP in Norway that has a proper e-mail setup. I don't know any Russian, but we have received several that the Babelfish says were sales pitches for learning English or were hawking rugs. I pasted in the 8 bit Subject from Outlook to replace the ??? ??? characters I was seeing. Received: from ti30a080-1050.bb.online.no [80.212.148.26] by mail.bentall.com (SMTPD32-8.02) id ADBB34A00E2; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 04:57:47 -0700 Received: from quiotix.com [138.111.146.127] by ti30a080-1050.bb.online.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866D97D16FD2 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:57:23 + Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 19:57:23 + From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Íîâûå ìåòîäû äëÿ âñåõ To: snip References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-RBL-Warning: ROUTING: This E-mail was routed in a poor manner consistent with spam [210f]. X-RBL-Warning: COUNTRY: Message failed COUNTRY test (206) X-RBL-Warning: NONENGLISH: Non-English characters found in E-mail. X-RBL-Warning: BENTALLSPAMHINT: Message failed BENTALLSPAMHINT test (1582) X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [80.212.148.26] X-Declude-Spoolname: D9dbb034a00e25104.SMD X-Spam-Tests-Failed: ROUTING, COUNTRY, NONENGLISH, BENTALLSPAMHINT X-Country-Chain: UNITED STATES->NORWAY->destination X-Note: Total spam weight of this E-mail is 15. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 12:57 PMTo: snipSubject: Íîâûå ìåòîäû äëÿ âñåõ Âàì ýòî ïðîñòî íåîáõîäèìî! Íeà8âjådðgígÿaêaàm 0Âpàrìi lídåaîbáaõwî0äièuìa 2àvízãxë2ètèuñ5êzèhék cÿiç1ûaê2 dâ3 7ð5àwá3îiò4å7 hèzëtèw 0â1 mîqáyùtårí8ètèx oífàn hîcòjä9ûlõyå2. Î1êuàsçfûiâaàyå8òtñyÿe,j bâbûqóv÷zèròlüj qèdílîxñ2ò1ðkàeíwítûféz xÿ5çnûrêl 1ìdîsæbíyî6 pîu÷9åiícü4 hë4ådã2êkîb yè2 háoûeñqòtðkîm!p 6Ä7ëuÿ mýxòhîeãeîz xäjîcñvòpà9ò9îy÷0ívîf qënèrøvük 6èhñ6ïkîkëpü5çaîqâbà2ò3üg iífàaøyóq 6ñnïuånö9èpàqëpü6í7ócþg ìdå8òfîuäxèiêdóu! Çaâeî0íkèmòfåo,m zêhîcí9òqàrê0ò3í5û1é8 aòpåuëdåtô9î2í2 sâu sÌrîjñvêoâ5åm: l1s-90c-c58-75p-w17-n8p-v6x --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.
Title: Message Yes u did the mistake of using a .com domain which are not registered... slap your fingers and repeat after me NEVER do this gain :-) -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew BrambleSent: 22. september 2003 09:53To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.I figured it out. The problem is definitely with Active Directory. Turning off DNS Client on the local server only created a situation where their first bogus sub-domain would timeout but a retry would still go to SiteFinder. Here's what nslookup returns when directed at the DNS server on the co-located machine (not running Active Directory): > adsfadsfasfdadsf.declude.comServer: ns1.igaia.comAddress: 208.7.179.11Non-authoritative answer:Name: adsfadsfasfdadsf.declude.com.primary.igaiaoffice.comAddress: 64.94.110.11That's the bogus sub-domain appended to my local Active Directory domain (replaced for security with an equivalent). The issue relates to the fact that my real Active Directory domain name is not registered and lies in the .com namespace, so when the lookup fails on the primary server, it goes back to the local Active Directory server and appends the lookup that produces no match to my unregistered Active Directory name, which returns the IP for SiteFinder. If I registered my Active Directory name, I wouldn't be directed to SiteFinder.Make sense now?MattBill Landry wrote: Are you running W2K or XP? If so, make sure you have the "DNS Client" service disabled. We setup all machines with it off by default now, because it has caused nothing but problems for us in the past by caching bogus info. Good luck! Bill - Original Message - From: Matthew Bramble To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 11:56 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. I think this has something to do with Active Directory. I have no clue as to where the lookup is coming from because it isn't cached. It is most certainly happening though:http://www.mailpure.com/VeriStrange.jpgI did a quick search and couldn't find any mention of this on Google.MattBill Landry wrote: But VeriSign does not even have the authority nor control over any other TLDs except .com and .net, so it doesn't make sense that you are having the name resolution issues you are experiencing. Bill - Original Message - From: Matthew Bramble To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. My primary is my mail/Web server that is co-located off-site running MS DNS without Active Directory. My secondary is my LAN's Microsoft Active Directory bound DNS server. The unregistered .com and .net misspellings are in my mail/Web server's cache, however these invalid sub-domains don't show up in the cache of either server.It's strange behavior. I wonder where my computer is getting this information. Maybe this is proof of why you shouldn't wildcard from the root servers?MattISPhuset Nordic AS wrote: what dns are u using ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 22. september 2003 08:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. Very strange. I just confirmed that it happens from both Netscape and IE on both local computers, but it doesn't happen on my mail/web server. I think this has to do with the fact that I am on a local network with Active Directory, which my mail/web server isn't using. Anyone else behind an Active Directory server that can confirm? Matt Andy Schmidt wrote: Can't reproduce here. I get regular "Not found" in my browser. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 01:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. I didn't realize this until a second ago, but VeriCorrupt is stealing traffic from every domain name out there on the Internet, regardless of the extension, and regardless of whether or
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.
Title: Message Which ip adresses are there on the servers u hve set up as dns on that maschine ? -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew BrambleSent: 22. september 2003 08:57To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.I think this has something to do with Active Directory. I have no clue as to where the lookup is coming from because it isn't cached. It is most certainly happening though:http://www.mailpure.com/VeriStrange.jpgI did a quick search and couldn't find any mention of this on Google.MattBill Landry wrote: But VeriSign does not even have the authority nor control over any other TLDs except .com and .net, so it doesn't make sense that you are having the name resolution issues you are experiencing. Bill - Original Message - From: Matthew Bramble To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. My primary is my mail/Web server that is co-located off-site running MS DNS without Active Directory. My secondary is my LAN's Microsoft Active Directory bound DNS server. The unregistered .com and .net misspellings are in my mail/Web server's cache, however these invalid sub-domains don't show up in the cache of either server.It's strange behavior. I wonder where my computer is getting this information. Maybe this is proof of why you shouldn't wildcard from the root servers?MattISPhuset Nordic AS wrote: what dns are u using ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 22. september 2003 08:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. Very strange. I just confirmed that it happens from both Netscape and IE on both local computers, but it doesn't happen on my mail/web server. I think this has to do with the fact that I am on a local network with Active Directory, which my mail/web server isn't using. Anyone else behind an Active Directory server that can confirm? Matt Andy Schmidt wrote: Can't reproduce here. I get regular "Not found" in my browser. Best Regards Andy Schmidt Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) Fax:+1 201 934-9206 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 01:34 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. I didn't realize this until a second ago, but VeriCorrupt is stealing traffic from every domain name out there on the Internet, regardless of the extension, and regardless of whether or not it is registered. Want to see something else that's quite strange? http://asfdasdsadfdsf.online.museum http://asdfaasdfasdf.site.biz For some reason that brings you to VeriThief's SiteFinder?? If you take out the ".online" it will take you to the wildcarded MuseDoma site. Seems that VeriSteal has some bleed over. Want to see something even worse? http://asdasdfasdfa.igaia.com http://asdfasdfasdf.declude.com Any lookup, registered or unregistered that doesn't return an A record is being directed at this site. Why the hell are these guys stealing traffic from the domain names that I am paying for? THIS MUST END! Up until now, I only thought this was limited to unregistered domains. VeriHijack can't be allowed to write the rules whatever way they see fit. They quite literally just took over the backbone of the Internet. Matt
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.
what dns are u using ? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 22. september 2003 08:05 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. Very strange. I just confirmed that it happens from both Netscape and IE on both local computers, but it doesn't happen on my mail/web server. I think this has to do with the fact that I am on a local network with Active Directory, which my mail/web server isn't using. Anyone else behind an Active Directory server that can confirm? Matt Andy Schmidt wrote: >Can't reproduce here. > >I get regular "Not found" in my browser. > >Best Regards >Andy Schmidt > >Phone: +1 201 934-3414 x20 (Business) >Fax:+1 201 934-9206 > > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble >Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 01:34 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. > > >I didn't realize this until a second ago, but VeriCorrupt is stealing >traffic from every domain name out there on the Internet, regardless of >the extension, and regardless of whether or not it is registered. Want >to see something else that's quite strange? > >http://asfdasdsadfdsf.online.museum >http://asdfaasdfasdf.site.biz > >For some reason that brings you to VeriThief's SiteFinder?? If you >take out the ".online" it will take you to the wildcarded MuseDoma >site. Seems that VeriSteal has some bleed over. Want to see something >even worse? > >http://asdasdfasdfa.igaia.com >http://asdfasdfasdf.declude.com > >Any lookup, registered or unregistered that doesn't return an A record >is being directed at this site. Why the hell are these guys stealing >traffic from the domain names that I am paying for? THIS MUST END! Up >until now, I only thought this was limited to unregistered domains. >VeriHijack can't be allowed to write the rules whatever way they see >fit. They quite literally just took over the backbone of the Internet. > >Matt > > > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain.
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 22. september 2003 07:34 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] VeriSteal is stealing traffic from your domain. I didn't realize this until a second ago, but VeriCorrupt is stealing traffic from every domain name out there on the Internet, regardless of the extension, and regardless of whether or not it is registered. Want to see something else that's quite strange? http://asfdasdsadfdsf.online.museum http://asdfaasdfasdf.site.biz For some reason that brings you to VeriThief's SiteFinder?? If you take out the ".online" it will take you to the wildcarded MuseDoma site. Seems that VeriSteal has some bleed over. Want to see something even worse? http://asdasdfasdfa.igaia.com http://asdfasdfasdf.declude.com ??? when doing this from my pc here uin norway I just get Page cannot be displayed Any lookup, registered or unregistered that doesn't return an A record is being directed at this site. Why the hell are these guys stealing traffic from the domain names that I am paying for? THIS MUST END! Up until now, I only thought this was limited to unregistered domains. VeriHijack can't be allowed to write the rules whatever way they see fit. They quite literally just took over the backbone of the Internet. Matt --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] How do I get removed
Lists every IP address. Should not be used. This one was included because it has a good point: you REALLY should know what and why a test blocks before using it. Confirmed 09 Apr 2002. http://www.declude.com/junkmail/support/ip4r.htm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Link Brokers Support Sent: 10. september 2003 15:29 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] How do I get removed How do I get off this spam list. URBL Im not even sure how I got on. http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ip4r.ch?ip=64.118.70.2 Kevin Shimwell Link Brokers Group, LLC ( Support ) 401 Ist Ave. North North Myrtle Beach, SC 29582 Phone: 843-663-1004 Fax: 843-663-1007 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 24/7 Support http://www.linkbrokers.com/support_ticket.cfm Support M-F 1-888-546-5631 [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Link Brokers Group, Inc Virus Protection] --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User Interface
Title: Message Well I can only speek for my self and i would NEVER again host everything on the same server -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew BrambleSent: 1. september 2003 20:15To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] User InterfaceWell, you can't always have it all :)Using IMail's Web server would seem like the most global choice, however I have not come across information about it supporting anything besides their own special tags and it doesn't seem like a friendly environment to work in. Does anyone know if this supports some sort of CGI besides the built in tags? Designing with IIS though would be a breeze, but not everyone hosts on the same box they do E-mail on, and gaining access to the files would require manual intervention to setup (and a network). Putting another Web server on the box seems like overkill maybe and won't allow the same degree of flexibility for most, however this might be the most universal approach.I wonder what the majority calling is for. I'm guessing that most host on the same box as their Web server, and most use IIS. I suppose that it should be designed in IIS to be as independent as possible from that environment and then ported to a stand-alone Web server if popular enough. That's something that I would ask my programmer about how best to do. I don't know how the guy does it, but he literally knows everything and has worked in virtually every environment with every language. He also makes everyone around him look lazy :)John, I see that you have done some of this stuff, as well as many others. I'm wondering why with all the interest, it hasn't yet been done? Also, if Scott is going to do this himself, I'm wondering if there is any estimate as to when it might become available. I'd hate to spend any time doing this for him to then come out with a solution. It looks like a daunting task if you try to allow for every possible configuration from global to domain to user. Maybe it would be better just to write a Hello World script instead and watch some TV with my spare time...MattJohn Tolmachoff (Lists) wrote: I think you hit the nail on the head on the differences on how this is to be done. Some want to be able to load on the same machine not using IIS, some want IIS. Some want to be able to load on a different machine not using IIS, some want IIS. John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of ISPhuset Nordic AS Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 9:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User Interface Sure this would be nice but pls do not use IIS as a webserver for doing this it would be muxh better having a standalone thing which we can set the port for us self with so many different configs that woule be the best Benny -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 1. september 2003 17:59 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] User Interface I'm very interested in this myself, the only thing that is stopping me is knowing what future plans that Scott might have for his configuration files and how that might impact the design. I can see that there have been a good deal of other folks designing interfaces from a search of the archives, however most seem somewhat proprietary to their needs and I would like to see something that was more flexible and probably cover other things like Declude Virus as well. Personally, it's my view that my end users generally have no clue about spam control, or even that is enabled on their accounts, and giving them configuration capabilities would confuse them, or at least something beyond giving them three levels of scoring and the option to turn it off. I would want to see something with per-domain and global settings (depending on your version), and maybe extend the product by creating something like digest notification for instance. Does anyone think that there's enough interest in developing such a thing(s) for someone to make some money from a reasonably priced add-on? I've got a programmer that could handle this stuff in his sleep :) Please chime in. Matt Jeff Kratka wrote: There was talk awhile ago about some people creating a web user interface for Declude. Did anyone come up with one? Jeff * TymeWyse Internet P.O.Box 84 - 583 N. Main St., Canyonville, OR 97417 tel/fax: (541) 839-6027 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
RE: [Declude.JunkMail] User Interface
Sure this would be nice but pls do not use IIS as a webserver for doing this it would be muxh better having a standalone thing which we can set the port for us self with so many different configs that woule be the best Benny -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Bramble Sent: 1. september 2003 17:59 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] User Interface I'm very interested in this myself, the only thing that is stopping me is knowing what future plans that Scott might have for his configuration files and how that might impact the design. I can see that there have been a good deal of other folks designing interfaces from a search of the archives, however most seem somewhat proprietary to their needs and I would like to see something that was more flexible and probably cover other things like Declude Virus as well. Personally, it's my view that my end users generally have no clue about spam control, or even that is enabled on their accounts, and giving them configuration capabilities would confuse them, or at least something beyond giving them three levels of scoring and the option to turn it off. I would want to see something with per-domain and global settings (depending on your version), and maybe extend the product by creating something like digest notification for instance. Does anyone think that there's enough interest in developing such a thing(s) for someone to make some money from a reasonably priced add-on? I've got a programmer that could handle this stuff in his sleep :) Please chime in. Matt Jeff Kratka wrote: > There was talk awhile ago about some people creating a web user interface >for Declude. Did anyone come up with one? > >Jeff > >* >TymeWyse Internet >P.O.Box 84 - 583 N. Main St., Canyonville, OR 97417 >tel/fax: (541) 839-6027 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] >* > > > --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] Osirusoft replacement ?
trying again anyone have any good replacements after this one died ? Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
[Declude.JunkMail] Osirusoft replacement ?
anyone have any good replacements after this one died ? Benny --- [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 type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
