> The 480e indicates a problem with the Date: header. This could be a
> year that is not RFC compliant, a future year, or other similar problem.
I've included the header. Can you point out what is wrong with the date?
I'll try. :)
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 18:43:50 -0500
The problem wi
I've included the header. Can you point out what is wrong with the date?
>From <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mon Feb 03 15:49:20 2003
Received: from postoffice.monocfcu.com [151.198.171.215] by mail.pcfcu.org
(SMTPD32-7.11) id AFFEE800CE; Mon, 03 Feb 2003 15:49:18 -0800
Received: through eSafe SMTP Relay
Does the "comments" test require non-whitespace before&after the comments in
order to trigger?
So that most legit messages will not trigger it?
Yes.
So the most common types of comments, such as:
or:
alert( "Hello, World" );
will not count.
The test is defined in the g
Does the "comments" test require non-whitespace before&after the comments in
order to trigger?
So that most legit messages will not trigger it?
-Original Message-
From: R. Scott Perry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 5:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Decl
We have just released Declude JunkMail v1.67 (beta). See
http://www.declude.com/junkmail/manual.htm . Notable changes since the
last beta include:
o Adds an "AUTOWHITELIST ON" option, to automatically whitelist
addresses in recipient's address book
o Adds a "comments" test type, to dete
[Responding to two separate posts here]
Any plans on changing that? If you host a mail server that has many
domains you sure can burn up a bunch of whitelist addresses quickly that
way.
The problem is that it takes quite a bit of code to determine exactly what
people want. For example, you w
I was trying to lookup a failed message header with the declude tools and I
am getting a PHP error message "failed to create stream.. access is denied"
Is anyone else having problems with the website and does anyone know what
the failure is for a "480e" error code for spamheaders?
Our web h
I was trying to lookup a failed message header with the declude tools and I
am getting a PHP error message "failed to create stream.. access is denied"
Is anyone else having problems with the website and does anyone know what
the failure is for a "480e" error code for spamheaders?
-Origina
> The "WHITELIST TO" command requires an exact match -- so you would need to
> enter "WHITELIST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "WHITELIST TO
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]".
Scott, wasn't there a discussion back in November that someone mentioned
about having postmaster@ and abuse@ listed in the Global.cfg for
wh
Scott,
Any plans on changing that? If you host a mail server that has many
domains you sure can burn up a bunch of whitelist addresses quickly that
way.
Darrell
Darrell LaRock
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Monda
My dial up users all use there client level "don't download larger than" option. If a
message is larger than say 300k, a flag comes through instead that gives the user the
option to download the actual message (including when) or they can delete without
download.
Seems to be that implimentin
The whitelisting of postmaster@ used to work, but this time it didn't.
Any thoughts.
GLOBAL CONFIG
WHITELIST TO postmaster@
WHITELIST TO abuse@
The "WHITELIST TO" command requires an exact match -- so you would need to
enter "WHITELIST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED]" and "WHITELIST TO
[EMAIL PROTECT
The whitelisting of postmaster@ used to work, but this time it didn't.
Any thoughts.
20030202 194515 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (958D00E6) [209.94.11.105] connect
148.78.247.23 port 56646
20030202 194515 127.0.0.1 SMTPD (958D00E6) [148.78.247.23] EHLO
apollo.email.starband.net
20030202 194515 127
> The two most common ones for E-mail are RFC821 and RFC822. I recall
> reading the requirement for E-mails to be stored on the hard drive, but
> don't remember which it was in (it may have been in a subsequent RFC).
>
Thanks, a quick search turned up nothing. I'll let you know if I find a
good
Scott,
How about a small executable that talks to console the same way
Declude.exe does to send a release signal?
Thanks,
Chuck Frolick
ArgoNet, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 10:03 AM
> However, if your remote access program can't access the Declude Hijack
> console, it's going to be hard to come up with a way to reset the IPs.
I know you are waiting in anticipation for me to say it, so I will: MS
Terminal services.
I was thinking something along the lines of a command prompt
It would be nice if there was a way to reset a held IP remotely to allow it
through.
That is a good idea.
However, if your remote access program can't access the Declude Hijack
console, it's going to be hard to come up with a way to reset the IPs.
-Scott
Does anyone off hand know which RFC talks about the proper action to take on
receipt of message, or a good RFC search tool? I remeber reading something
about req'mt to store on HD. We're looking at setting up gateway server and
using SMTP Verfiy to the destination server so we don't have to exp
Does anyone off hand know which RFC talks about the proper action to take on
receipt of message, or a good RFC search tool? I remeber reading something
about req'mt to store on HD. We're looking at setting up gateway server and
using SMTP Verfiy to the destination server so we don't have to expor
>> These are just the defaults for creating new users,
The limits themselves are actually set on the userlevel. <<
No - they are NOT.
I went through this with IPSwitch when messages were rejected for an inbound
IP address (IP bound domain), even though the VIRTUAL domain and INDIVIDUAL
users were
I also have a Hijack request.
When Hijack is triggered on hold 2, often times it is some one inside
sending out a broadcast. After talking to that person and explaining what
happened, I need to allow that IP through again.
Currently, the only why to do this is to stop (close) the console window.
It has been a feature of every version of IMAIL I remmeber using thus far.
Currently I have 6.x and it is located in both The web-administration tools
& Imail Admin
In IMAdmin,
Its on the first tab when clicking on a virtual host.
Defatult Max mailbox size, Single message max size, default max me
Sorry - I can't tell whether your old Imail 5 has that feature - or, whether
it was added in Version 6 or 7. I would consult IPswitch's web site for
historic information going that many years back. I started with Imail 4 and
don't recall if/that it WAS added after that - but I may not have paid
a
Reply to: Andy Schmidt
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Reject Msg based on Size on Monday 8:07:22 AM
This is not in my earlier version of Imail... Does this do this
on an account basis or domain basis? It must be in later versions
unless I am missing something.
--
Roger Heath
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.r
Why not control the message size in Imail - you can set it per domain and, I
believe, per user.
If the message exceeds the max message size, Imail will reject it - and it
will result in a bounce from the SENDING server.
In fact, Imail's ESMTP will announce the max message size to the sending
serv
Reply to: R. Scott Perry
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Reject Msg based on Size on Monday 7:12:40 AM
He has a dialup modem and wants to limit per message size.. It would
save processor, if a partial message was returned to each the sender
and the original message if not delivered might save 1/2
> Is this something that others might find useful?
Is this not already a imail feature? (Or: What has this to do with
junkmail?)
We've set in SpamChk 3 limits on 24, 48 and 64 kByte because we've seen
that nearly all spam messages are smaller then this values.
So depending on the size we give
Hi;
Is this not something that one can do at the Imail level? I thought you
could limit the size of message per user if you want.
Regards,
Kami
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 8:13 AM
To: [
Scott, I just had an MIT engineer/user suggest a feature to reject
messages based on their size. I found this fascinating personally.
You could look at the size and bounce, e.g.
SIZE 10MB BOUNCE
Might be a server saver also... especially if it bounced a
partial response smaller message.
29 matches
Mail list logo
