> Received: from mout3.freenet.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by mymxserver.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9868FB16D96
> for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 14:32:46 -0400 (EDT)
I am beginning to suspect that it's possible to spoof localhost to get
around assp. Anyone have any thoughts? I'm sure that
Collecting =>Max Bytes (MaxBytes) is set to 32000
The entire source of the spam is attached (only mydomain name was
modified). Unziped it is only 9k
At 16:25 2009-07-29, you wrote:
Are you sure that whyza.net is in the first ( maxbytes ) part of the
mail? How big is maxbytes?
Please show me
Hi all,
please anyone who is using 0.3.20 - 0.3.22 - upgrade to 0.3.23 .
Fixing some stupid mistakes!
Thomas
DISCLAIMER:
***
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are
Are you sure that whyza.net is in the first ( maxbytes ) part of the
mail? How big is maxbytes?
Please show me the part of the mail, where whyza.net should be catched.
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free
As requested, the example is bellow:
Jul-29-09 03:00:51 Connected:
111.222.333.13:55106 -> 1.2.3.4:25 -> 127.0.0.1:125
Jul-29-09 03:00:51 recipi...@ourdomain.com
matches recipi...@ourdomain.com in LocalAddresses_Flat
Jul-29-09 03:00:51 id-47251-00739 111.222.333.13
accepting triplet:
(111.222
sorry - it seems that I was not realy woken up this morning, when I sent
this 3.20 to Fritz
Thomas
"Konrad Olszewski"
29.07.2009 16:49
Bitte antworten an
ASSP development mailing list
An
"ASSP development mailing list"
Kopie
Thema
Re: [Assp-test] (no subject)
same error in line 3
Thank you, no errors found in the log any more.
regards
Marco
-Original Message-
From: Fritz Borgstedt [mailto:f...@iworld.de]
Sent: Mittwoch, 29. Juli 2009 17:00
To: ASSP development mailing list
Subject: Re: [Assp-test] (no subject)
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>same erro
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>same error in line 34027 now (division by 0)
sorry, 22 should do it.
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report d
same error in line 34027 now (division by 0)
--
Serdecznie pozdrawiam,
Konrad Olszewski
Etop Sp. z o.o.
Al. Jerozolimskie 200, 02-222 Warszawa
telefon 022-5780 100
telefaks 022-5780 101 http://www.etop.pl
Regon 016310320 NIP 522-25-50-755 KRS 029426
Sad Rejonowy dla m. st. Warszawy, XII
I stand corrected :-)
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
On 29.07.2009, at 18:41, "Fritz Borgstedt" wrote:
> ASSP development mailing list
> schreibt:
>> Fritz,
>>
>> Surely that makes it easier
>
> No, it does not make it easier.
>
>
> ---
> ---
> ---
> ---
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>Fritz,
>
>Surely that makes it easier
No, it does not make it easier.
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your rep
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>Anyone got version RC 0.19 - i lost my backup and with the problem in
>line
>8414 of ver RC 0.20 its real pain to get it work again
try RC 0.3.21
--
Let Crystal Reports handle
just add
DoDamping:=5
to assp.cfg
and it make it fly
--
Serdecznie pozdrawiam,
Konrad Olszewski
Etop Sp. z o.o.
Al. Jerozolimskie 200, 02-222 Warszawa
telefon 022-5780 100
telefaks 022-5780 101 http://www.etop.pl
Regon 016310320 NIP 522-25-50-755 KRS 029426
Sad Rejonowy dla m. st. Warsz
Fritz,
Surely that makes it easier
log: spam/imaspam—43.eml (then write to DeleteDB)
logged: 29/07/09 (then write to DeleteDB + x days)
Therefore, DeleteDB would reflect
Filename: spam/imaspam—43.eml
DeleteOn: 29/10/09
If someone manually deletes the files, then when the Daily DeleteFile s
Anyone got version RC 0.19 - i lost my backup and with the problem in line
8414 of ver RC 0.20 its real pain to get it work again
Thank You in advance
--
Serdecznie pozdrawiam,
Konrad Olszewski
Etop Sp. z o.o.
Al. Jerozolimskie 200, 02-222 Warszawa
telefon 022-5780 100
telefaks 022-5780 101 h
We are talkiing catch % not spam %.
In my installations, the catch % percentage is >99,999 %.
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>Seeing that the filenames should be unique (either by number, or by
>subject+number), surely a separate DB with deletion date?
The entries in the logs are already pointing to the folder/filename.
Changing that would make the whole process off finding them
Maybe you just see mails passing by because they are proxied as SSL
message through ASSP. Look into the assp logfile for STARTTLS messages.
Op 29 jul 2009, om 15:10 heeft Маллиндайн Стивен (Steve Mallindine)
het volgende geschreven:
> Trevor,
>
> My bad
>
> Losf –i | grep urd
>
> Lsof sh
> Would just like peoples opinions on what catch rate they would expect
It has changed a lot in the past year, especially since mid-March. On
one server I was getting ~2,100 connexions a day in mid-March. That
server now gets about ~6,700 a day and it's still rising The rate
a year or so
I had made a cleanup in the server and will have
to check for a new case where I can see the e-mail incoming with this problem.
Please wait.
Regards,
Hilário Fochi Silveira
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - F
Trevor,
My bad
Losf –i | grep urd
Lsof shows the ports as services.not as port numbers...
Steve
On 29/07/2009 17:03, "Trevor Jacques" wrote:
> Do lsof –i | grep 465 This will tell you which program is listening
> on port 465 ;-)
This returns nothing at all, despite netstat -na | g
> Do lsof –i | grep 465 This will tell you which program is listening
> on port 465 ;-)
This returns nothing at all, despite netstat -na | grep LIST still
showing more than one occurrence of port 465 :-/
T.
--
Le
Hi all,
Would just like peoples opinions on what catch rate they would expect
(realistically – no system will be 100%) on their spam filters, and what
they’re actually getting
(Making reports for my boss)
To make a startI would have expected around 95%...but on a quick
examination tod
What about file with these fields:
FileName
DateCreated
DateModified - if needed
OtherFlags - if needed too
AndAnotherFlags...
And so on, and so forth.
This file can be converted into DB table, if needed.
Best regards,
Alexander Shabalin
-Original Message-
From: Charles Marcus [mailto:
Fritz,
Seeing that the filenames should be unique (either by number, or by
subject+number), surely a separate DB with deletion date?
Steve
On 29/07/2009 15:26, "Fritz Borgstedt" wrote:
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>
>I very strongly agree... it would be much better to 'adjust'
>
Seams to go wrong on this one (Exeption on line 8414 division by zero)
sub ConDone {
my %isDamping;
foreach my $con (keys %ConDelete) {
my $damptime = $Con{$con}->{messagescore} / $DoDamping;
$damptime = $damptime > 0 ? $damptime > $maxDampingTime ?
$maxDampingTime :
On 7/29/2009, Charles Marcus (cmar...@media-brokers.com) wrote:
> Hmmm... well, if a simple 'delete all messages older than x + 30 days',
That should have said:
"... if a simple 'delete all messages older than x + 30 days' WON'T
WORK,...'
--
Best regards,
Charles
On 7/29/2009, Fritz Borgstedt (f...@iworld.de) wrote:
>> I very strongly agree... it would be much better to 'adjust'
>> accordingly the date being evaluated *against*, rather than change
>> the date/time stamp of every email.
> How would that work? We need to mark files not to be deleted the nex
ASSP development mailing list
schreibt:
>
>I very strongly agree... it would be much better to 'adjust'
>accordingly
>the date being evaluated *against*, rather than change the date/time
>stamp of every email.
How would that work? We need to mark files not to be deleted the next
month or so. The
On 7/29/2009, 0;;8=409= !B825= (Steve Mallindine) (st...@sc.ru.ru) wrote:
> I would question the wisdom of doing it this way. Lots of system
> checks/anti hacking software will complain about these files ( on the
> theory that it's not possible for a file to have a created/modified
> date in
30 matches
Mail list logo
