Joe,
It's the natural place to start, and for those that want to get deeper
into things, there's plenty of potential for improvement. Keep
tinkering, that's the best way to learn as there is no single best
formula on how to configure Declude.
Matt
Joe Raykiewicz wrote:
Is the
The first message's source is well listed and should have been tagged
better if your tests were in the default configuration, and many would
probably have thrown every more at it.
http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ip4r.ch?ip=205.138.96.41
The second E-mail looks to be severely munged and has no
Hello all,
I just received an email with the following headers...
Received: from mx1.myoffer2u.com [205.138.96.41] by mail.pepperlink.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-8.05) id A8B120AA00BA; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 17:44:01 -0500
Received: from centramedia.net (205.138.96.41) by mx1.myoffer2u.com
(PowerMTA(TM)
Is the $default.junkmail and global.cfg files that
come with Junkmail the recommended settings? Is this what I should use for
my installation? I have it setup and have been playing with all the
settings, basically tinkering to learn.
Thanks,
Joe
Paul,
Here's what Cyan said about a month ago...
-
From: "Cyan Callihan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2004 13:19:07 -0800
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] BONDEDSENDER, spam hit on Virtumundo
Please send all of your complaints...to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I will investi
I haven't received many False positives (false negatives in this case?) on the test.
It seems to help lower the scores on some of the legitimate optin mail that falls into
the grey area (travelocity, cnn, about.com, dowjones.com, ebay, fedex, Motley Fool,
Southwest, United, VH1) that may be fail
Does anyone have any recent thoughts (Pros and Cons) toward BONDEDSENDER.
Fred
---
[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 PROTECTED], and
type "unsu
KD> I have written an external test that at the domain level allows
KD> the administrator decide whether the "domain" or "user" level
KD> has priority when whitelisting or blacklisting.
What's your logic in that?
The idea is the following:
A specific company has certain organizatio
Just was looking a drug spam that came through with a weight of 12
(failing SORBS-DUHL and CMDSPACE). I know many of you have seen this
(which is why I asking for help.) It had the standard random gibberish
of correctly spelled words, but making no sense -- I guess to throw
phrase analysis. Ex.:
Hello David,
Tuesday, March 9, 2004, 1:06:42 PM, you wrote:
KD>a. Using %ALLRECIPS% can cause problems when there is a larger
KD> number of recipients. Some of the parameters may not be passed
KD> or may be are stripped off due to limitations of the length of a
KD> comma
I am not absolutely sure, but I think that it is in the default file. To
find out more about HABEAS, go to www.habeas.com. It's supposed to be
some kind of certificate for non-spam mail. It is supposed to work, but
obviously there are some who abuse it and they're being sued...
Cheers,
Adrian
Yep that's there. I don't ever remember putting it in though. Does it come
with a default global.cfg file?
Yes, WHITELIST HABEAS came with the default global.cfg file for quite some
time. Since a spammer decided to risk getting sued by infringing on the
Habeas legal rights, we are recommending
Yep thats there. I don't ever remember putting it in though. Does it come with a
default global.cfg file?
What is it?
Thanks
-- Original Message --
From: Adrian Titei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 13:14:51 -050
You must have a line like "WHITELIST HABEAS" in your global.cfg. That's
responsible for letting it through.
Adrian
Timothy Bohen wrote:
>
> Any help on why this got through? I see the line about being whitelisted but I
> cannot find this ip or domain in my whitelist?
> Thanks
>
> Received: fro
Here's the problems I have run into setting up an External Plus Test:
1. Declude only uses tests the external plus test 1 time for each
message.
a. Using %ALLRECIPS% can cause problems when there is a larger
number of recipients. Some of the parameters may not be passed
Any help on why this got through? I see the line about being whitelisted but I cannot
find this ip or domain in my whitelist?
Thanks
Received: from dynamic-ip-cr20011851123.cable.net.co [200.118.51.123] by
mail1.cmsinter.net
(SMTPD32-8.05) id A5B951D700C0; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 11:50:01 -0500
Recei
I'm working on a white list solution to allow per user white listing
based on the sender/sending domain. My setup is primarily as Store
and Forward for another server. I have about 500 domains with about
20,000 users doing 300k msgs per day.
"Redirect"ing looks like a nice option but I'm a bit
I think so, yes. Thanks!
-Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Lyndon Eaton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:20 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Message routing question
Its the OE Rule you need to re-write.
With the later versions of OE you
I believe that by default Imail puts [EMAIL PROTECTED] to folder
anything in the mailbox of [EMAIL PROTECTED] I know you can change this
behaviour, but I do not know where of hand.
Nate
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Doherty
Sent: T
Its the OE Rule you need to re-write.
With the later versions of OE you have a condition that's is 'Where the
message is from the specified account'.
So in Tools>Accounts>Mail you'd have one profile/account to download
from the main mailbox, and another for downloading from the spam
mailbox.
Ins
Hi,
I need to find a way to route email to a spam folder in a client's Outlook
Express setup.
I had him set up two POP boxes, [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(which OE combines into one folder set) and a message rule so that anything
addressed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] is routed into a spam f
21 matches
Mail list logo
