Dave,
There's a kludge that can be done for this that I call a combo filter.
If you are using 1.78+ and the Pro version, you can code up a filter
that adds extra points when both tests are failed. For an example of
how this works, see the following archive post:
http://www.mail-archive.co
Hi,
I've been seeing a lot of spam the last couple of days that fails both the
REVDNS and BASE64 tests and nothing else.
I hold on 10, and based on a year of experience with balancing the usual
factors of false positives versus catches, I have each of these tests
scoring a 4. Needless to say, thi
Scott,
I'd some checking and the error should have been occurring all the time, but
for whatever reason it was not. The problem was with the external plus test. I was
opening up the envelope header (the Q file) and extracting the sender and all
recipients. Apparently this was the p
Thanks, Scott. Actually, we're back at IMail 7.15. I have yet to see any
real benefit in the 8.x series.
Ben
- Original Message -
From: "R. Scott Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 2:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] per user settings q
Hmmm..., that doesn't quite do what they want. They have an mailbox
"julie", and nobody is an alias that resolves to julie. They want different
JM settings for mail specifically addressed to julie versus mail addressed
to no legitimate mailbox (which would get handled through the nobody alias).
As much as I believe Fox&Friends morning show tells no lies .. I'd rather
verify it with a reputable source:
- Google does in fact own Gmail.com
- It sits on the Google network
- gmail.google.com == gmail.com
- and www.Gmail.com says 1000 MB.
I'd say that makes it official.
Jonathan
At 03:06 PM
Hmmm..., that doesn't quite do what they want. They have an mailbox
"julie", and nobody is an alias that resolves to julie. They want different
JM settings for mail specifically addressed to julie versus mail addressed
to no legitimate mailbox (which would get handled through the nobody alias).
F
Saw this on Fox&Friends this morning...is the real thing.
Samantha
-Original Message-
From: Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Google Gmail.com
Anyone think this is a hoax?
They are offering 1 gig of
>
> I'll one-up you here...I've got every E-mail sent and received (minus a
> few large attachments) since 05/30/1996 on my PC thanks to Netscape :)
>
Only one-up if you include the size !
Brad
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)]
---
This E-mail
R. Scott Perry wrote:
It's true (see http://www.google.com/gmail/help/about.html ). While
it is huge, they can easily handle it -- they have most of the web
pages on the Internet cached.
1GB, though, isn't all it's cracked up to be -- I've got close to
200MB of posts from the IMail Forum sitt
MSNBC reported that it IS NOT a hoax.
But considering MSNBC record for inaccuracy, it probably is a hoax.
At 12:07 PM 4/1/2004 -0800, you wrote:
Anyone think this is a hoax?
They are offering 1 gig of free email space. That is a lot!
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
(h
Anyone think this is a hoax?
They are offering 1 gig of free email space. That is a lot!
It's true (see http://www.google.com/gmail/help/about.html ). While it is
huge, they can easily handle it -- they have most of the web pages on the
Internet cached.
1GB, though, isn't all it's cracked up
Looks like the real deal to me. Still in beta but they seem to be serious
about it.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kevin
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Google Gmail.com
Anyone th
Not in the least. They are also going to allow searching of all the
E-mail ever sent and received using their technology as well. The only
concern that seemed to be mentioned was how to migrate to a pay-for
service, though they are supporting their venture with ads.
No doubt this will get add
Anyone think this is a hoax?
They are offering 1 gig of free email space. That is a lot!
---
[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
We have JM Pro, and have a few per-user settings. Now we have a client with
a "nobody" alias setup to catch all emails that aren't specifically
addressed to one of their mailboxes. They want custom JM settings for this
nobody alias. Can we just setup a nobody.jumkmail file like we would for
any
We have JM Pro, and have a few per-user settings. Now we have a client with
a "nobody" alias setup to catch all emails that aren't specifically
addressed to one of their mailboxes. They want custom JM settings for this
nobody alias. Can we just setup a nobody.jumkmail file like we would for
any
We use AT&T for out T1. We had so many problems with AT&T DNS we had them
delegate the reverse to us and now we host our own DNS.
Kevin Bilbee
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Darrell LaRock
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 8:41 AM
> To
I noticed this about a year ago on some of the other DNSBL's; they are trying to
reduce DNS load by making these types of queries fail.
> Scott,
>
> It's AT&T's DNS servers. I wonder if they are doing something to block
> those kinds of lookup's.
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Dec
Scott,
It's AT&T's DNS servers. I wonder if they are doing something to block
those kinds of lookup's.
Darrell
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Dec
I noticed that several RBL's have not been triggered off one of our backup
mail servers over the last 24 hours. For example SPAMCOP hasn't. I turned
on "DEBUG" mode and noticed that it was reporting this
04/01/2004 10:56:53.296 Q3bbb215802381bda Test #18 [ORDB] is same as Test
#18 [ORDB=*]. Answ
I noticed that several RBL's have not been triggered off one of our backup
mail servers over the last 24 hours. For example SPAMCOP hasn't. I turned
on "DEBUG" mode and noticed that it was reporting this
04/01/2004 10:56:53.296 Q3bbb215802381bda Test #18 [ORDB] is same as Test
#18 [ORDB=*]. Answ
I'm running 1.78i28.
PREWHITELIST is only entered once in the global.cfg, so no overriding. I
have 7 whitelist lines in the global.cfg, three are IP ranges, three are
domains, and the 7th is an ANYWHERE whitelist. In the Global.cfg,
PREWHITELIST ON is above my WHITELISTs (if that makes any differ
Hi Scott,
I'm running 1.78i28.
PREWHITELIST is only entered once in the global.cfg, so no overriding. I
have 7 whitelist lines in the global.cfg, three are IP ranges, three are
domains, and the 7th is an ANYWHERE whitelist. In the Global.cfg,
PREWHITELIST ON is above my WHITELISTs (if that makes
Sorry, I also have a WHITELIST AUTH.
Email checked by UKsubnet anti-virus service
To prevent email abuse & block spam
contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44(0)8712360301 Web: www.uksubnet.net
Fax: +44(0)8712360300
Powered by UKsubnet Internet Service
Having added PREWHITELIST ON in my GLOBAL.CFG file, my server still
seems to be running the SPFFAIL test on 'local'/whitelisted IP
addresses. Any ideas?
Are you running v1.70 or later? Do you also have a line "PREWHITELIST OFF"
(which could override the ON setting)? Where exactly is the whiteli
Hi Scott,
Having added PREWHITELIST ON in my GLOBAL.CFG file, my server still
seems to be running the SPFFAIL test on 'local'/whitelisted IP
addresses. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Lyndon.
Email checked by UKsubnet anti-virus service
To prevent email abuse
We've just upgraded from Imail 6.06 to 8.05 (but now 8.1 is out).
I really wanted to upgrade because there are a number of issues with v6
(and I believe pre 7) that I didn't think were good at all. Small % of
miss deliveries, trying to send mail to domain A records instead of MX,
display bug with
28 matches
Mail list logo
