No backup software, no on access scanning. I am having some other problems
with the machine - I'm about to nuke it regardless - I just wanted to make
sure that declude was still being called to scan for viruses until I get
this box formatted... ugh
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECT
Yes but now I am watching THE O.C. and thinking about SPAM tests
Thanx
Goran Jovanovic
The LAN Shoppe
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff (Lists)
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 9
Don't you know it is already a quarter past 9 up there?
Correct.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 5:31 PM
Hi All,
I'm trying to use VirusScan's scan.exe as a second virus scanner for my
Imail server using declude.
But the problem is when I run scan.exe from a prompt it tells me the
dat files are from Jan 2003 and only detects something like 63,000+
viruses.
I can' seem to get the dat files for sca
John,
WHITELISTTO if it is an incoming domain (which means it is hosted on the
IMail server?)
WHITELISTFROM if it is just passing through?
Right?
Thanx
Goran Jovanovic
The LAN Shoppe
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
> [EMAIL PROTECTE
> I was careful to say that it will "appear" like an open relay. This
> is important because I saw two different GroupWise servers attacked
> in the same week because they accepted every message regardless of
> domain...
"Regardless of domain?" That's not what happens with MS SMTP (with or
wi
There were e-mails delivered between 5:15 and 5:33 - This "could not lock
message" should've just effected just that one e-mail. It shouldn't have
stopped Declude from being called for 15 minutes. Correct?
After a closer look at the logs, this was what I found - what could cause so
many errors?
W
> It's a bad idea to use SPFPASS.
Agreed.
> SPF Fail should in theory give you similar results to SPAMDOMAINS,
> though it's not very widely adopted at present so the hits should be
> lower.
SPF FAIL is much, much more robust than SPAMDOMAINS, and there's no
deployment difficulty that SPF
Sanford Whiteman wrote:
You can configure MS SMTP to gate all E-mail through a 'Smart Host',
but it won't do any address verification on the gateway and it will
appear like it is an open relay.
That's not true--whether or not address verification is done for MX
domain
Create a per domain configuration file for that domain and leave it blank.
You could also WHITELISTTO or WHITELISTFROM in the Global.cfg.
John Tolmachoff
Engineer/Consultant/Owner
eServices For You
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.JunkMail-
> [EMAIL PROTECTE
> If I set up the SPF TXT record for certain customer domains on our
> DNS Server. Legit messages should be comming only from our
> Mailservers IP.
Right, that's what you specified when you created an SPF record. Many
seem not to quite to grasp this, but all SPF does is set an accepta
User the WHITELIST AUTH global.cfg setting. all authenticated users will
automaticallbe whitelisted.
Kevin Bilbee
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Markus Gufler
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 2:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject:
> You can configure MS SMTP to gate all E-mail through a 'Smart Host',
> but it won't do any address verification on the gateway and it will
> appear like it is an open relay.
That's not true--whether or not address verification is done for MX
domains has nothing to do with being an open r
I guess I was too brief-
There were e-mails delivered between 5:15 and 5:33 - This "could not lock
message" should've just effected just that one e-mail. It shouldn't have
stopped Declude from being called for 15 minutes. Correct?
After a closer look at the logs, this was what I found - what coul
Win 2000:
Right click SMTP service ->
Properties ->
Access ->
Relay ->
[x] Only the list below:
( enter your allowed-to-relay IP ranges )
OK ->
OK ->
SMTP Service -> Domains
Right click "Domains"
New.. -> Domain -> (repeat for each...)
Domain Type = remote ->
name=commarts.com ->
Hi,
I am doing store and forward (gateway) processing for multiple domains.
What is the best way NOT to do JunkMail for a domain? I may only want to
do Virus scanning for that particular domain.
Thanx
Goran Jovanovic
The LAN Shoppe
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude
Mike,
To do a backup MX right, it is best to use a server that is physically
located elsewhere and uses a different bandwidth provider. I found
another administrator to help me with these services using a combination
of MS SMTP and VamSoft's ORF. You can configure MS SMTP to gate all
E-mail t
Title: Message
Oh,
that is the reason why I haven't upgraded to IMail. I'm still waiting for
them to be able to drop the connection the moment an email is
passing a certain Spam threshold and/or is detected as a virus - then
I WANT to be able to drop the connection rather than "confirming"
Interesting. ORF gives you the option to disconnect and I'm wondering
if it is wise despite the 20 year old stipulation in the RFC:
Close SMTP connection when blocking
The Open Relay Filter Enterprise Edition blocks the spam when the
remote server tries to specify the message recipient(s). ORF
Ok, thanks for your responses.
Another question:
If I set up the SPF TXT record for certain customer domains on our DNS
Server. Legit messages should be comming only from our Mailservers IP.
Now one of our customers send a legit message trough our mailserver.
Wouldn't this create a wrong result
Fred, I don't have your off list email address. If you're still needing CF
help, reach me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keith Purtell, Web/Network Administrator
VantageMed Corporation (Kansas City office)
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any attachments, is
for the sole use of the int
I just came across an issue where DNS Report was giving me a failure for
the following:
FAIL
Connect to mail servers
ERROR: I could not connect to one or more of your mailservers:
mx2.mailpure.com: Connection closed before I received all my data (state
8). Your mailserver disconnected before i
I would like to set up an SMTP mail "store and forward" server using
Microsoft's SMTP server that can accept email for my domains in the event
that my primary iMail server is temporarily down. I would also like to be
able to send outbound email through this secondary server because we
occasionally
Scott,
I just came across an issue where DNS Report was giving me a failure for
the following:
FAIL
Connect to mail servers
ERROR: I could not connect to one or more of your mailservers:
mx2.mailpure.com: Connection closed before I received all my data (state
8). Your mailserver disconnected be
Logentry for that time period - there is a gap?
05/05/2004 05:15:07 Qae350111006606b6 Could not lock
D:\IMail\spool\Qae350111006606b6.SMD; timed out (j=2).
05/05/2004 05:33:09 Qae85002a00623cd4 Tests failed [weight=44]: SBL=WARN
HELOBOGUS=WARN IPNOTINMX=IGNORE NOLEGITCONTENT=IGNORE MOREIPS=WARN
FI
Running IMAIL 8.05
Declude Virus/JM 1.79 beta
Headers:
Received: from SMTP32-FWD by mail.prudentialrand.com
(SMTP32) id A043C; Wed, 5 May 2004 05:32:02
Received: from gurushy.com [207.226.69.162] by mail.prudentialrand.com
(SMTPD32-8.05) id A121AA0064; Wed, 05 May 2004 05:17:21 -0400
Co
It's a bad idea to use SPFPASS. Spammers are already exploiting this
and there is no way to stop them from doing so. Essentially SPF Pass
is a hole in spam blocking just like Habeas is.
SPF Fail should in theory give you similar results to SPAMDOMAINS,
though it's not very widely adopted at
Anyone familiar with Coldfusion that can answer a question.
Please email me off list.
Sorry to bother the remainder of the list.
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,
I think you may not be understanding the test.
The spf record that determines weather or not the messages passes or fails
is published by the domain owner and they are saying if they allow mail to
be send from what servers. So if a message fails the domain owner is saying
it has failed an the user
> What do you consider a wrong result
If SPFPASS has a positive result (and so will SUBSTRACT points from the
final weight) for a SPAM message.
or
If SPFFAIL has a positive result (and so will ADD points to the final
weight) for a LEGIT message.
In absolute numbers the "wrong results" are
For me:
spffail 0.89% of May's mail
spfpass 1.18% of May's mail
for spffail:
221 SPAM (>weight 33) 99.1% (pretty good test)
2 NotSpam ( weight 33)
1 Possible SPAM (weight 17-33)
249 Not Spam (< weight 17)(85%, poor to average test)
Scott Fisher
Director of IT
Farm Progress Companies
>>> [EM
What do you consider a wrong result
Kevin Bilbee
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Markus Gufler
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 12:11 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and SPF
>
>
>
> No one els
No one else seeing such results with SPF?
Markus
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Markus Gufler
> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 8:32 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and SPF
>
>
> > S
Hello,
Scott was talking about using Bind for the DNS purposes of the mail
servers. I have a question about that.
I'm in the process of testing and then rebuilding our secondary mail
server (currently running RedHat 8 with Sendmail; going to upgrade it to
White Box Enterprise Linux
You could create one, or possibly Scott could work the exceptions into
Declude.
The code that is tripping this is UUENCODED and not specific to the
attachment type. There are two lines that I am aware of that signal a
UUENCODED attachment:
begin 666
begin 600
You would need to be ru
> >This email failed some tests that it shouldn't--at least the COMMENTS
> >test--from what I can tell. Help please.
>
> Unfortunately, there isn't much that can be done about this
> -- it seems
> that some .PDF files are sent in a strange way that causes
> them to appear
> to have anti-filte
Mike,
You should remove the ZAPTHEDINGBAT filter. There were newer versions
of this that would resolve the problem that you see here, but Microsoft
patched the flaw and it is no longer being widely used or even used at all.
Matt
Mike Gable wrote:
This email failed some tests that it shouldn't-
This email failed some tests that it shouldn't--at least the COMMENTS
test--from what I can tell. Help please.
Unfortunately, there isn't much that can be done about this -- it seems
that some .PDF files are sent in a strange way that causes them to appear
to have anti-filter HTML comments in th
This email failed some tests that it shouldn't--at least the COMMENTS
test--from what I can tell. Help please.
Thanks,
-Mike
Warnings:
X-RBL-Warning: ZAPTHEDINGBAT: Message failed ZAPTHEDINGBAT test (37)
X-RBL-Warning: GIBBERISH: Message failed GIBBERISH test (303)
X-RBL-Warning: COMMENTS: 5 H
To be clear, it is a TXT record you will add, not an A record.
-Dave
- Original Message -
From: "Steinar Rasch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 3:29 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and SPF
> > >Where do I actually add the TXT Record fo
40 matches
Mail list logo
