Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Email Address Error

2004-03-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
No that is not black listed. Is the .@ against any standard. No, that is a perfectly valid format. I can't explain why the Exchange server would reject the E-mail, unless it was blacklisted for some reason. -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The

[Declude.JunkMail] Wget batch file

2004-03-04 Thread Gene Head
Does anyone have a batch file to automaticaly download files from Kami's site using wget? I've looked on the archive for this but haven't found anything. Thanks Gene --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Non-beta release

2004-03-04 Thread Agid, Corby
Looking foward to it. Thanks -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 5:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Non-beta release I'm wondering when the next full (non-beta) release

[Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers

2004-03-04 Thread Bill Landry
Scott, can you think of any reason why the DNSBL RHSBL and a few other tests are being logged with ignore? They are being included in the message weight, but it is preventing these failed tests from showing up in the message headers. Tests failed [weight=34]: BLARS-SPAM=IGNORE CSMA-SBL=IGNORE

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers

2004-03-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Scott, can you think of any reason why the DNSBL RHSBL and a few other tests are being logged with ignore? Yes. Because the config file that is being used has the IGNORE action (or doesn't have the tests listed). They are being included in the message weight, but it is preventing these failed

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers

2004-03-04 Thread Bill Landry
- Original Message - From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] Scott, can you think of any reason why the DNSBL RHSBL and a few other tests are being logged with ignore? Yes. Because the config file that is being used has the IGNORE action (or doesn't have the tests listed). All

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers

2004-03-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Yes. Because the config file that is being used has the IGNORE action (or doesn't have the tests listed). All tests are listed and, as I said, all tests are set to warn. The best way to determine what is happening here is to use the debug mode. To use the debug mode, you can change the

[Declude.JunkMail] One of the new viruses

2004-03-04 Thread Kevin Bilbee
Just a note for helping trap some of the new viruses. I do not know which virus is the problem because our gateway is successfull in deleteing the attachment before doing the virus scan. But whichever one it is uses the domain name of the recipient in the HELO string. For example if the mail was

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers

2004-03-04 Thread Bill Landry
I will send you the debug output off-line. Bill - Original Message - From: R. Scott Perry [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Missing headers Yes. Because the config file that is being used has the IGNORE

[Declude.JunkMail] Anyone have a current spamdomains file?

2004-03-04 Thread Chuck Schick
Does anyone have a current spamdomains file they would care to share? Chuck Schick Warp 8, Inc. 303-421-5140 www.warp8.com --- [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

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
I have WEIGHT40 set to bounce in the global.cfg. I know you're looking for an answer, but before I give it to you, can I ask why you are using WEIGHT40 BOUNCE? -Scott --- Declude JunkMail: The advanced anti-spam solution for IMail mailservers

[Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread Jim Rooth
Title: Bounce not an action?? Scott, I have been noticing this for a couple of days. I didn't say anything because of the tremendous load you have had for the last three days. Good job in getting under control! I am running v1.78i9. But even before that (running with v1.65) I was getting

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread Jim Rooth
Not because I want to, that's for sure. But I have my largest customer who wants all mail to be sent back so the sender can see their email didn't go through. They average 900 emails a day just from bounces! The overhead caused by it is extremely detrimental but they pay the bill like clockwork.

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
Jim Jim Jim. What can I say. Sometimes, it is hard to use that new fangled transmission that only has 9 gears instead of 13. Check the current JunkMail manual and archives, and you will be surprised. John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From:

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread R. Scott Perry
Not because I want to, that's for sure. But I have my largest customer who wants all mail to be sent back so the sender can see their email didn't go through. They average 900 emails a day just from bounces! The overhead caused by it is extremely detrimental but they pay the bill like

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread Jim Rooth
Heck, I thought they had 10 gears but the 10th and 9th were reversed to give you a great overdrive. Shows what I know. I will check the archives again and see if I can find something that tells me different than don't use BOUNCE! That would be the simplest solution... Jim Rooth Clotron, Inc

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
No don't forget, shifting from 9 to 10 is now done by the computer. (Man, I hate that transmission. Just feels weird.) John Tolmachoff Engineer/Consultant/Owner eServices For You -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Bounce not an action??

2004-03-04 Thread Matt
Jim, It's the fact that administrators bounce spam or unaddressable E-mail accepted by gateways for large sites like AOL and Yahoo that have completely ruined the use of the nobody alias for my domains because this forged stuff is constantly hitting my server, bounced from someone like you or