John, for what it's worth, I find that CBL and selective SORBS tests are
much more reliable since I renamed them to include DYNA in their test
name, resulting in my giving them higher weights.
Much of what gets get caught that way are the zombies on broadband networks.
Matt's DYNAMIC test
FWIW, I've been running v8.05 since it came out; I was getting at least one
spam per day that was not getting Decluded and thus made it to my own Inbox,
and today I received my first non-Decluded spam.
Not scientific, but it's another data point.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From:
Andrew,
Did you reboot SMTP or the server? There's an issue where it doesn't
seem to call Declude while it is in the process of shutting down, but
it's only a matter of a few seconds. I'm not sure if this has been
reported to Ipswitch either, although Scott and Kami are aware of it.
Matt
Thanks Andrew. I haven't had much time to look at SPF yet, but it does look
promising.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Thursday,
I have 4 entries in my declude default junkmail file to send email to
different accounts for review:
WEIGHT10WARN
WEIGHT20WARN
weight35copyto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
weight50routeto [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The problem I'm having is that the email for weight 35 is getting
Gene:
You have to remember that when you state Weight10- you are in essence saying
Weight 10+
That is 10 to infinity
Then Weight20 is the same.
Your best bet in doing what you want to do is to gate your weights using
Weightrange rather than weight.
That way you have full control for the
Gee Kami, you are as bad as I am. ;)
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kami Razvan
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 9:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:
Thanks. I'll make those changes.
Gene Head
ACCRAM Inc.
MCP,Net+,A+,CCNA,CCDA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff
(Lists)
Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2004 10:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Then how about a test to check if the MAILFROM is syntax correct, meaning
has some characters, the at sign, some characters, a period, and some more
characters?
This will be changed for the next release. I can't think of any other
reason (aside from bounces, using ) that an address without an @
Scott, unless they have changed the math since I went to school...does this
look right ?
No. But the log file entries should help. If not, using LOGLEVEL HIGH
will include a log file entry that shows how the weight was calculated.
-Scott
---
Hello Scott.
FYI, I have seen some spam, maybe 5 out of 1500, that had only @ as the mail
from address.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Gene,
Sounds like you may have the weights configured as weight instead of
weightrange.
Darrell
Check Out DLAnalyzer a comprehensive reporting tool for
Declude Junkmail Logs - http://www.dlanalyzer.com
Gene Head writes:
I have 4 entries
12 matches
Mail list logo
