I've responded to this off list.
If anyone else experiences anything similar please let me know.
Thanks!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Scott Phelps
| Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 12:09 PM
| To: [EMAIL
The only difference between the live Message Sniffer and the demo is the
message counting logic - which amounts to about 5 lines of code. If it
works at all, it should continue to work - just like the production
version.
I have sent new code to Scott John to test with,... Hopefully we will
get
the demo software and re-posted it.
Again, our humblest apologies for this processing error.
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Madscientist
| Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 2:14 PM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail
We use Message Sniffer and the following configuration in
$default$.junkmail with very good results...
SNIFFER HOLD
#SNIFFERSUBJECT [SPAM:SNIFFER]
RBL FOOTER [SPAM ALERT RBL - SENDER FOUND IN RBL DATABASE]
DUL FOOTER [SPAM ALERT DUL - SENDER FOUND
We recommend to our sniffer customers that they hold messages so that they
can recover any false positives that show up. Rather than looking through
the held messages, keep them around for 30 days or so and if a false
positive possibility is reported by a user then you can hunt down the
message
My$0.02
If we're going to focus on interpreting IP wildcards which will require some
extra code I suggest we simply recognize some well known standard forms such
as:
216.88.36.0/24
or an alternate form with a mask
216.88.36.0 255.255.255.0
This would make it easy to speak the same langage as
You might try leaving the bad headers test in place but whitelist the source
of the joke list. Whitelist entries are supposed to bypass all tests. This
methodology follows a classic firewalling technique = block everything,
then punch holes for what you need.
_M
| -Original Message-
|
We recommend using HOLD and then running an automatic job to delete older
files from the holding bin after a month or so. The idea is that if a
false-positive is reported, you can find or grep for the specific content a
customer is looking for and then re-insert it into the queue - and adjust
Yes.
Global.cfg defines the tests.
$default$.junkmail describes how to apply them to incoming mail.
Hope this helps,
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Tolmachoff
| Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:21 PM
| To: [EMAIL
What if you were to hold them, but then set up a scheduled job that runs
once per hour or so. That job would:
1. copy all held messages back to the queue for delivery.
2. move all held messages into a review directory (to clear the hold area
for next time.
The result would be almost the same
Another possibility is the global cc...
What if you set up the global cc to a review mailbox.
Then set up that review mailbox with an IMail rule to delete any message not
contianing a warning string?
Just thinking outside the box.
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
I've received
messages from many of you requesting a trial version of Message
Sniffer.
That trial version
is now available. Please see http://www.sortmonster.com/Sniffer/index.html for details. Please also let us
knowhow your trial goes;-)
Thanks,
_M
We use JunkMail pro and can't imagine working without it. Not only does it
support our Message Niffer product nicely (www.sortmonster.com) but it
allows you to customize how rules are interpreted (actions) for different
domains - this is a must since most people see spam differently. That is,
one
The Sortmonster Sniffer system takes this into account by limiting the
inbound traffic through the existing filters. That way, the only messages
that come into our system to be processed are those that are not yet coded
into our filter mechanisms... In theory, as we grow our subscriber base and
How about MSG_TOP and MSG_BOTTOM ?
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
| Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2002 8:45 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] header confusion
|
|
|
| The HEADER action is
If I might jump in here with a couple of comments.
We are able to happily bill $2/mo per mailbox.
In part, we offer spam and virus scanning and place no limits on mailbox
size (we bill also for storage space).
Most of our clients are small corporations. All of our clients are satisfied
and
There is a tweak for this in declude. You can set the maximum number of
decludes that will run at one time. This helps set limits in cases like
this.
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Travis Sullivan
| Sent: Tuesday, September 25,
I stand corrected, but the purpose is the same.
Thanks,
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
| Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:16 AM
| To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude crashing and
I've alwasy been curious why there isn't a manual link on the product page
so you can find it from the web site.
Thoughts?
_M
| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry
| Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 1:44 PM
| To: [EMAIL
101 - 119 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
