ASSP does have it since 2 years. Switch to ASSP V2 which is the newest
version, you should also switch to the test mailing list
Assp-test mailing list
assp-t...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
---
For Users of ASSP schreibt:
>(feature request) per recipient scoring settings.
Spam Friends ** (spamFriends)
A list of local user addresses that when matched will reduce the
messagescore with friendsValencePB. This will make the scoring filter
more softly. if you use negative weights here, th
For Users of ASSP schreibt:
>So?
So?
--
LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial
Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support
Improve your efficiency, and focus on deliver
Smap fighting has broken so may rfc I could not even count. Some of
these changes even created another rfc-s. Google and gmail breaks many
rfc-s in plain sight. So?
--
LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for I
For Users of ASSP schreibt:
>
>There should be a option to override spf neutrals (?all) for specified
>domains (feature request).
"Neutral" should not used The domain owner has explicitly stated that
he cannot or does not want to assert whether or not the IP address is
authorized. A "Neutral" re
> What you guys think about a x-mailer blacklist ??
It's already there; have a look at the regexp/spambomb
section of ASSP, all you'll need to do will be adding your
regular expressions there
--
The Planet: dedicated a
For Users of ASSP writes:
>
>What you guys think about a x-mailer blacklist ??
>
>I know that not all e-mail arrives with x-mailer header, but a lot of
>spam
>mailers use this "feature" and could be usefull if ASSP could
>identify and
>block (or score) them .
Use the Bomb/Regex feature to block
Run ASSP 2.0, the feature is already implemented.
fritt
--
___
Assp-user mailing list
Assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
nty Government, IIT
> pdick...@fredco-md.net
> 301-600-2399/x12399
>
>
>
>
>> From: Fritz Borgstedt
>> Reply-To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>>
>> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 01:15:10 +0100
>> To: Questions and Answers
99/x12399
> From: Fritz Borgstedt
> Reply-To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>
> Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 01:15:10 +0100
> To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: white
0 +0100
> To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: white/not white report in spam
> submission re
>
> try 1.4.4 with option
> Spam Report & Check Whitelist (EmailSpamShowWhite)
> If set Spam Report will ad
try 1.4.4 with option
Spam Report & Check Whitelist (EmailSpamShowWhite)
If set Spam Report will additionally check if addresses are on the
Whitelist.
--
___
Assp-user mailing l
P Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>
> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:42:21 +0100
> To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
>
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: white/not white report in spam
> submission re
>
> "Paul K. Dickson" schreibt:
>&
"Paul K. Dickson" schreibt:
>Thanks for the response. No. Below I have the response from a
>whitelist submission. Notice your address. It would be nice if a
>'thisisspam' submission showed the whitelisted/notwhitelisted status
>of any addresses in the submission the same way whitelist submissi
On 12/3/2008, Hill, Brett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> If you're talking about stripping off attachments for emails with
> viruses or malware, why would you want to give your users access to that
> content? Sounds pretty daring if you ask me.
thats not what I mean.
Of *course* this functionalit
Charles Marcus wrote:
> Actually, we are (or at least *I* am) talking about the
> ability to strip off (*not* simply block) attachments *and
> dump them into a web accessible directory somewhere*, *and
> add some text with a hyperlink to the attachment so the
> recipient can download it*.
I do
On 12/3/2008 6:54 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>> I'm NOT saying that attachment stripping 'belongs' here, I'm just
>> saying that if it can do it reliably, then it is a viable
>> candidate.
>>
>> I think Fritz already said he wasn't interested in such a feature, so
>> its a moot point anyway...
>
On 12/3/2008 6:41 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>> I would *never* allow those through *any* mail system - but, to each
>> his/her own...
> why not? Are you blocking your users from downloading .exe from the
> internet too?
Yep... only admins can do that.
In my opinion, in a corporate environment,
GrayHat wrote:
> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for
> ASSP, all in all such a feature has nothing to do with junk
> email filtering :)
Just to add my 2 cents worth. I disagree. I use attachment stripping
in my environment. My firewall currently does it by way of prox
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>My comments re: ASSP being a viable candidate for the job of strpping
>attachments stands...
The text on the assp 2 site says:.
NEW FEATURES
- email interface for add/remove spamlovers
- cron-like scheduler for builtin-rebu
GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>I disagree; what you call "more than filtering" is just a "side
>effect"
>of some
>of the mechanisms used by ASSP to filter messages; on the other hand,
>stripping attachments or even blocking them by size isn't imVHo a job
>for
>ASSP, but for the backend MTA;
>I would *never* allow those through *any* mail system - but, to each
>his/her own...
why not? Are you blocking your users from downloading .exe from the
internet too?
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Mov
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>I'm NOT saying that attachment stripping 'belongs' here, I'm just
>saying
>that if it can do it reliably, then it is a viable candidate.
>
>I think Fritz already said he wasn't interested in such a feature, so
>its a moot poin
On 12/3/2008, GrayHat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Exactly ! So, if you setup the MTA to refuse messages over a given size,
> the MTA will emit an SMTP error and you'll have your reject; I can't see
> where's the problem ! You aren't generating bounces, just rejecting the
> message due to "policy r
> But if the MTA is going to reject a message, that rejection should
occur
> at SMTP time.
Exactly ! So, if you setup the MTA to refuse messages over a given size,
the MTA will emit an SMTP error and you'll have your reject; I can't see
where's the problem ! You aren't generating bounces, just rej
On 12/3/2008, GrayHat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> what you call "more than filtering" is just a "side effect" of some
> of the mechanisms used by ASSP to filter messages;
I disagree...
CONVERTING one file type to another is certainly NOT a normal function
of an anti-spam filter - and as for it
>> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for ASSP, all
in
>> all such a feature has nothing to do with junk email filtering :)
> Neither does IETF conversion... this is why I proposed it - since ASSP
> is already doing more than junk mail filtering, *and* is the initial
> point o
On 12/3/2008 3:29 AM, GrayHat wrote:
> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for ASSP, all in
> all such a feature has nothing to do with junk email filtering :)
Neither does IETF conversion... this is why I proposed it - since ASSP
is already doing more than junk mail filtering,
On 12/3/2008 3:57 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
> GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>> On the other hand, attachment *blocking* imVHo is good to have
>> and isn't "something from the past" :) consider that recent malware
>> mutates quickly, so an AV may not be able to detect a new variant
>> of a
> IMHO it is VERY outdated.
not totally :)
> I do not do it now for several years. I have NEVER experienced such a
> scenario.
in a quite recent past there were "waves" of malware pumped out by
bots, the attachments were quite small and their signatures changed
from message to message and for a
GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>On the other hand, attachment *blocking* imVHo is good to have
>and isn't "something from the past" :) consider that recent malware
>mutates quickly, so an AV may not be able to detect a new variant
>of a given worm; this in turn means that blocking "executabl
> Duplicate attachments are a "big" problem at my day job, but
> other than attempting to train the end users to store the files on
> the network, and working off these files (at least when they are
> in the office), instead of emailing them back and forth, not much
> else I can do about it.
well;
>> I'm not advocating any one product or another here, and can't really
>> speak for other mail server products, but when you say
>> "about 80%+ - of storage is from DUPLICATE large attachments."
>>
>> In Exchange, the message store only contains one copy of an identical
>> file and that single co
>Yeah !
>I'll have to agree with Joseph.
>Somewhere , somehow, people have lost the meaning with
>e-mail handling.
Quite amazing. Obviously you are in the business of educating your
users. That is not my business.
I sell them a service and do everything, they feel good. Hardware is
cheap and it
e <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request: Attachment stripping - WAS:
> Re:Random problem
> To: "'Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy'"
>
> Date: Saturday, 29 November, 2008, 8:36 PM
> >5000 *40 MB i
>5000 *40 MB is actually 200 GB which is nothing at todays hard disk
>prices.
Except if they have *many* attachments that big;)
>Our users have a standard mailbox capacity of 200 MB, they can pay to
>have it expanded to 500 MB, 1 GB or unlimited.
That adds some sanity I guess.
>This is at leas
WOW !
> From: Fritz Borgstedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request: Attachment stripping - WAS:
> Re:Random problem
> My users are allowed to receive messages up to 40MB.
^^
What kind of l
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schreibt:
>That sounds very familiar. Sort of like the shared mail
>functionality
>of Domino/Notes. Wow, I can't believe I just recommended someone
>look
>at Notes. :)
FirstClass is doing the same.
-
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>
>Good cripes, do clients pull their mail locally or is it stored
>centrally?
>5000 * 40Mb * {however many they have} = Lots of space :)
5000 *40 MB is actually 200 GB which is nothing at todays hard disk
prices.
Our users
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 11/28/2008 Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>
>> Those attachment blocking "features" are from stoneage. They are not
>> necessary anymore.
>> Everybody should allow their users receive attachments freely.
>>
>
> The problem is, in any environment with more than a few users
>>What's your user base?
>
>
>5000 Users
Good cripes, do clients pull their mail locally or is it stored centrally?
5000 * 40Mb * {however many they have} = Lots of space :)
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin You
>What's your user base?
5000 Users
fritz
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip f
>My users are allowed to receive messages up to 40MB.
What's your user base?
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win grea
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Since ASSP 2.0 now can make use of DB backends, storing and searching
>hashes of these large files should be very doable...
fine, looking forward to see it.
Donald Brooks wrote:
> I'm not advocating any one product or another here, and can't really
> speak for other mail server products, but when you say
> "about 80%+ - of storage is from DUPLICATE large attachments."
>
> In Exchange, the message store only contains one copy of an identical
> file and
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>
>Mail server aren't dealing nicely with big files. They take a lot of
>processing time too. Your not limiting e-mail over 10 megs or 15 megs
>?
>Are you ?
My users are allowed to receive messages up to 40MB.
--
t single copy in the emssage store is "linked" to all local
addresses that were CC'd, and copies that were forwarded.
-Original Message-
From: Charles Marcus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 1:57 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam
On 11/28/2008 Maxime Frenette wrote:
> Mail server aren't dealing nicely with big files. They take a lot of
> processing time too. Your not limiting e-mail over 10 megs or 15 megs
> ?
> Are you ?
Because of the nature of our business, we (must) deal with lots of large
attachments... the max size
s for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request: Attachment stripping - WAS:
Re:Random problem
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Blocking attachment over a specified size is still necessa
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Blocking attachment over a specified size is still necessary
why?
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build
On 11/28/2008 Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
> Those attachment blocking "features" are from stoneage. They are not
> necessary anymore.
> Everybody should allow their users receive attachments freely.
The problem is, in any environment with more than a few users - ours,
for example - and deals with lots
-
From: Fritz Borgstedt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 28 novembre 2008 13:26
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request: Attachment stripping - WAS:
Re:Random problem w
>Since ASSP has now opened the door to this kind of &#x
>Since ASSP has now opened the door to this kind of 'added'
>functionality, I would absolutely *love* to see it have the ability
>to
>strip off attachments (over a specified size), dump them in a
>specified
>directory, and prepend a block of text to the top (or bottom -
>configurable?) informi
> Would it be possible to add a "|" after the second value in
> each information triplet to make parsing easier?
> So
> ID | first value | second value ID | first value | second
> value ID | first value | second value becomes ID | first
> value | second value | ID | first value | second value
Hello,
> try (23)
it is not working. The domain is still rewritten. But I think I
didn't explain my problem exactly:
I need to exclude a domain from being rewritten by SRS - not to
exclude it from a SRS test.
Greetings
Matti
>
Matti Haack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>Could this be implemented? Or is it already possible?
try (23)
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search
GrayHat wrote:
> I don't know how many here use the ASSP
> "infected email report" feature, I do (at least
> on some servers) now, from time to time it
> may be interesting having the full original
> email message headers in such reports
> this may be useful to find out the "path" of
> the message
I'm familiar with this implementation from SpamAssassin. I'm not seeing
it's utility, however. How is it different from using TotalScore to
filter messages? How is "maybe spam"/"spam" different from the Low/High
Threshold settings?
What do you find lacking in the current options?
Matti Haack w
That is what I meant:)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fritz
Borgstedt
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 4:51 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request.
>I have often wis
>I have often wished that was there, for regex's like "paypal\.com".
>Sounds great to me!
But paypal.com is a good example for keeping it off the whitelist.
This is working today (I guess nobody is using it besides me))).
And it is automatic.
---
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Fritz
Borgstedt
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 4:13 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request.
>Is there any possibility of changing that options checkbox to a
&g
>Is there any possibility of changing that options checkbox to a
>numeric option? such as
the change is different, but the options are now there in the newest
built.
I am thinking of expanding the option. that nothing can be added to
whitelist if on redlist
to: nothing can be added/removed to w
owser for IMail / SmarterMail
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Neill
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 2:27 PM
To: assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request - Remote Command Execution
Simply put the idea is abou
>
>Simply put the idea is about:
>
>- telling ASSP to forward (proxy) incoming E-Mails to certain named
>recipients to a different IP address and/or port
You already understood, that ASSP is working as a synchronous proxy.
It immediately connects a sender to the server. To do what you want,
we
Patrick Neill wrote:
> - telling ASSP to forward (proxy) incoming E-Mails to certain named
> recipients to a different IP address and/or port
>
> In a second step these sorted out E-Mails could then be used for whatever
> purpose one sees fit. In my case they would trigger a program that starts a
Simply put the idea is about:
- telling ASSP to forward (proxy) incoming E-Mails to certain named
recipients to a different IP address and/or port
In a second step these sorted out E-Mails could then be used for whatever
purpose one sees fit. In my case they would trigger a program that starts a
So if I understand this thread correctly, the discussion is as follows:
1) ASSP is installed on a server which connects either Internet->LAN or
Internet->DMZ
2) We want to give an application on this server the ability to execute
remote commands based on (hopefully) sanitized input directly from
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>
>What is this good for?
>
>- normal e-mail would continue to pass through ASSP to the main
>mailserver
>(Exchange in my case)
>- e-mail to special addresses (like [EMAIL PROTECTED]) would go
>to my
>secondary mailserver (Merc
Patrick Neill wrote:
> Fritz, that would forward any e-mails to a set of defined addresses
> to a mailserver other than the main mailserver.
I'm going to agree that this isn't a "spam-fighting" function
What you want can be done in Exchange- or it could in 5.5, so I don't
know why it still can't.
Fritz, that would forward any e-mails to a set of defined addresses to a
mailserver other than the main mailserver.
What is this good for?
- normal e-mail would continue to pass through ASSP to the main mailserver
(Exchange in my case)
- e-mail to special addresses (like [EMAIL PROTECTED]) would
gt; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:assp-user-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Neill
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 March 2007 9:18 AM
> To: assp-user@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request - Remote Command Execution
>
>
> The SMTP Server option (Mercury Mai
>ASSP could also "Forward to these Recipients always",
what exactly should this option do?
fritz
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to sha
The SMTP Server option (Mercury Mail) is what I am using right now.
However I am forced to move the server to Exchange and have not
yet found a way of doing command execution on receipt of an E-Mail
in Exchange.
Anyway, I noticed that ASSP has already got the Genes to a possible
solution in the '
> I would suggest that you could do this by using a program to scan the
> ASSP maillog file looking for the right keyword. You would need to
> capture the date/time for the log entry and compare that against when
> the last WOL email was received to ensure that the request isn't old.
That may be a
rs for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
> Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature Request - Remote Command Execution
>
> I would suggest that you could do this by using a program to scan the
> ASSP maillog file looking for the right keyword. You would need to
> capture the date/time for
I would suggest that you could do this by using a program to scan the
ASSP maillog file looking for the right keyword. You would need to
capture the date/time for the log entry and compare that against when
the last WOL email was received to ensure that the request isn't old.
You could do this wit
Patrick Neill wrote:
> Ok, this may not be directly related to killing Spam, but nevertheless useful
> on a proxy.
>
> One of my current mailservers (Mercury Mail) allows me to execute a command
> (batch file) if an e-mail is sent to a specific address. I use this for Wake
> on Lan. Say I want to
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Traylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: Strip first received line of
header
> use it because the project is ~dead and hasn't had any updates in almost a
&g
> Users like me have all inbound mail route through an ISP. This adds one
> received line to the top of the header file.
>
> The problem is, that this line makes it impossible to use the great RTBL
> feature. How about adding a pre-processing option to strip the first
> "received" line?
Until I
Michelle Dupuis wrote:
> 1. A spammer is unlikely to add a blacklisted IP to a forged message (and
> if they do, their messages deserves to be killed anyways)
True, but what if they spoofed a whitelisted IP address?
> 2. If the connecting IP is legit (as it would be coming through our ISP),
> t
>I personally would vote no on such a feature, I've used GFI
>mailessentials that does this and frankly it's only caught false
>positives using the other headers.
This feature is not for you, but for people, who do *no* DNS-queries
in ASSP today.
So giving them the feature does not add to the l
lient's IP is updated.
MD
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 1:51 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: Strip first received
Michelle Dupuis wrote:
> A lot of companies are using 3rd part services as a backup MX (queuing) for
> disaster recovery etc; so mail is routed through that ISP.
>
> You're right about stripping off the first received line can be handled
> differently - perhaps the RTBL processing can match all IP
>A lot of companies are using 3rd part services as a backup MX
>(queuing) for
>disaster recovery etc; so mail is routed through that ISP.
Yeah, but it is waste. And completely unnessary.
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more?
eader?
MD
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 12:42 PM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request: Strip first received line of
header
Michelle D
Michelle Dupuis wrote:
> I would like to throw out a feature request - which sounds (based on my
> little knowledge) like and easy fix/implementation.
>
> Users like me have all inbound mail route through an ISP. This adds one
> received line to the top of the header file.
>
> The problem is, th
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>Users like me have all inbound mail route through an ISP. This adds
>one
>received line to the top of the header file.
One line? You are sure? ISPs like myself may add some hops between
receiving and forwarding
---
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>The problem is, that this line makes it impossible to use the great
>RTBL
>feature. How about adding a pre-processing option to strip the first
>"received" line?
That would do nothing to enable this features for ASSP. ASSP i
"Ged West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>I have changed the wording on (http://assp.sourceforge.net/docs.html) to
> reflect that the Original Documentation is still relevent to ASSP. If
> anyone has any other suggestions as to changes in the wording let me
> know.
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Fritz
Borgstedt
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2006 9:30 AM
To: Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
Subject: Re: [Assp-user] Feature request / Suggestion
>I updated a page in the Wiki (Documentation) to reflect that, but I
>don't know how to tou
>I updated a page in the Wiki (Documentation) to reflect that, but I
>don't
>know how to touch the into page to the documentation on the
>sourceforge site
>(http://assp.sourceforge.net/docs.html). If anyone knows how to
>modify that
>page, please let me know.
"Ged West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is
"Fritz Borgstedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Perhaps until the Wiki is fully
>>populated with all the old information, that we should remove that
>>disclaimer in the old site and say that it is incomplete, referring
>>people
>>to the Wiki for updated documentati
>Perhaps until the Wiki is fully
>populated with all the old information, that we should remove that
>disclaimer in the old site and say that it is incomplete, referring
>people
>to the Wiki for updated documentation instead of saying that it is
>outdated.
>Similarly, the Wiki should possibly point
"Micheal Espinola Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The Wiki is what people make of it. If you see something that should be
> there, put it there, or talk about it on a discussion tab. Talking
> about the Wiki /here/gets nothing done /on/ the Wiki.
Very valid po
I'm very happy with my ASSP implementation, Fritz. Thank you for all
your hard work.
What I was suggesting would be for new "customers", ie. New users of
ASSP. I was thinking it might assist in adoption.
As an ASSP user, I know my preferences and settings would be very
different than yours so
Eric B. wrote:
> indicates that the documentation is old and quite possibly outdated. So I
> can't really blame new people asking about documentation when the site
> itself says that it is outdated. :) Perhaps until the Wiki is fully
> populated with all the old information, that we should remove
"Fritz Borgstedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>My understanding is that Fritz, for the most part, uses the default
>>settings - in other words, the defaults he sets are the ones that he
>>uses himself...
>
> Yes, I do, and if not, the default is chosen that the syst
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>
>My understanding is that Fritz, for the most part, uses the default
>settings - in other words, the defaults he sets are the ones that he
>uses himself...
Yes, I do, and if not, the default is chosen that the system shou
On 12/6/2006 Eric B. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> The default settings are rather lack-lustre at best, and didn't help
> me learn much. Fritz's examples, however, helped me enormously. I
> know that had there been more examples I could look at/learn from, I
> know it could only be more beneficial.
"Micheal Espinola Jr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chris Norman wrote:
>> One thing that would make ASSP easier to adopt is some basic settings
>> recommendations. Think browser security settings (high, medium, low).
>> At least it would configure ASSP for the new
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
