Why would the following headers not fail the test for spamcop
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=2F8D2F.E89E_C9CBF._F.F3
X-Priority: 1
X-RBL-Warning: NOABUSE: Not supporting [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [217.34.209.231]
X-Note: This
Why would the following headers not fail the test for spamcop
X-Declude-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [217.34.209.231]
X-Spam-Tests-Failed: AHBL, NOABUSE [8]
Unfortunately, Spamcop no longer gives out the details that they used
to. If the E-mail was sent within the past 39 hours, it should
Since upgrading to 8.05 and Declude 1.78i23 my objectionable language filter
is causing a postmaster loop. Because the original message was included
with the word. I'm not even sure why as the postmaster I even got the
notice, it usually just goes to the sender. Has anything been changed?
I've
Matt,
I used to put routers in these types of situations, but now I don't. I
would suggest you/your customer look at some of the low end Netscreen
firewalls like a 5GT. You can get these under $500 and they have way more
value than a router..
One of the best things about the netscreen
Darrell,
That's not a bad suggestion. They have only one public server, the SMTP
gateway, but they're using a Linksys for VPN. They could just replace
the Linksys with a real firewall.
I was initially trying to come up with a 2-hour solution that could also
be integrated just as quickly
This looks like it's IMail that's looping the message if I'm not
mistaken (X-Mailer: IMail v8.05). Maybe the change that prompted the
new behavior is IMail passing off automated E-mail to Declude for
scanning whereas before Declude wasn't being called (guessing). If a
filter in Declude is in
30 minute sutup Sonicwall TZ170 which also supports VPN
Kevin Bilbee
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 3:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Cheap router to limit by IP
