Re: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam Review Program

2002-01-28 Thread David Barrett
I was setting up a networkpath path eg. \\123.123.123.123\imail for the log files. But There was a type-o so I got a runtime error. Now when I start the program the error persists. I just uninstalled and reinstalled. Dave - Original Message - From: Tom Schwarz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To:

DSN:Re: [Declude.JunkMail] MISSING_REVERSE_DNS:Newbie questions onfilters charging

2002-01-28 Thread smb
Chris, Using the weighting system in Declude JM (depending on how you set it up) you should find in most cases anything failing 3-4 or more tests should give you a very high degree of confindence it is spam in the 70-80% range you mentioned. Stu At 08:36 PM 01/26/2002 -0500, you wrote:

RE: Re[2]: [Declude.JunkMail] Spam Review Program

2002-01-28 Thread Tom Schwarz
Open regedit and search for SpoolPath to find your entry. You can either delete the entry or fix it. Next time you open the program you should be ok. I will fix the problem asap!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Barrett

[Declude.JunkMail] Question about Adult Test

2002-01-28 Thread Wes Harper
I know that the ADULT test is only in testing at the moment, but I can't seem to get it to work at all. Here's what I have in my GLOBAL.CFG file ADULT adult x x 30 0 Here's what I have in my $default$.junkmail file ADULT HOLD X-RBL-Warning: Failed Adult

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] User .junkmail file that doesn't wantspam control

2002-01-28 Thread R. Scott Perry
If I have a user that doesn't want any SPAM control (they want everything to go through) what do I need to put in their *.junkmail file? You can set the action to everything to IGNORE. I'm guessing the X (like XINHEADER) info that's in the GLOBAL.CFG will still show up in their headers? Is

[Declude.JunkMail] Updated to 1.34 and nothing is being caught?

2002-01-28 Thread Grant Griffith
Hello All, I just upgraded to the new 1.34 version and set weights of 3, 10 and 15. However I am getting messages that are getting thru and not being held. Below are my settings, can anyone tell me what I might have incorrect? ** * GLOBAL.CFG * ** ORBZIN

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Updated to 1.34 and nothing is beingcaught?

2002-01-28 Thread R. Scott Perry
I just upgraded to the new 1.34 version and set weights of 3, 10 and 15. However I am getting messages that are getting thru and not being held. Below are my settings, can anyone tell me what I might have incorrect? Everything looks like it is set up properly. Below is a message

[Declude.JunkMail] spamreview headers

2002-01-28 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, Apparently spamreview likes it better when warnings are added to the header using XINHEADER (I assume). Without the warnings, all of the content of the email is being displayed in the Message Header window. syntax on using that feature more fully is appreciated. I'm guessing it may be

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] spamreview headers

2002-01-28 Thread Tom Schwarz
Yes, this is true, for now. I have a fix that will be in the next release. (waiting on an email from Scott to confirm) However, I like including warnings in the header so I can see why the email was put in the Hold state. Spamview will display all warnings from the Headers and Body in the Junk

[Declude.JunkMail] ORDB:Does Declude Junkmail work with alias/lists?

2002-01-28 Thread Jack Taugher
Does Declude Junkmail work with aliases and lists, or just users? We have a small group of users, that are tied to a list -- and are indicating they are receiving considerable amount of junkmail. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] ORDB:Does Declude Junkmail work withalias/lists?

2002-01-28 Thread R. Scott Perry
Does Declude Junkmail work with aliases and lists, or just users? It can work with both. We have a small group of users, that are tied to a list -- and are indicating they are receiving considerable amount of junkmail. Their E-mail should be scanned, using the settings in the

[Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

2002-01-28 Thread Todd Holt
Does anyone else find it ironic that IPSwitch email fails SPAMCOP?? Does IPSwitch care? Todd --- [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

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

2002-01-28 Thread R. Scott Perry
Does anyone else find it ironic that IPSwitch email fails SPAMCOP?? I don't see their primary mail server listed. Which IP is listed? -Scott --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

2002-01-28 Thread Chuck Schick
Actually it is people who post to the list. I have found that many people that post there will get the failed spam cop test in the header.That is why you only see it intermittently. Chuck Schick Warp 8, Inc. www.warp8.com 303-421-5140 - Original Message - From: Todd Holt [EMAIL

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

2002-01-28 Thread Todd Holt
Oh. Never thought of that! That would make sense. Thanks, Todd -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chuck Schick Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 5:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] IPSwitch email failed SPAMCOP

2002-01-28 Thread Todd Holt
Here is the fragment from the declude log file, but I think that someone else already pointed out that the problem is from the headers that other people put on the message. 01/28/2002 11:31:30 Q8ade142 Msg failed SPAMCOP (Blocked - see http://spamcop.net/bl.shtml?156.21.1.8). 01/28/2002 11:31:30