We use both Declude (1.76beta) and Sniffer and both work great.
However, we are are in the process of trying to run several Sniffer
tests and take action on individual return codes rather than nonzero.
It is my understanding that Declude will only call the Sniffer test once
although numerous
We use both Declude (1.76beta) and Sniffer and both work great.
However, we are are in the process of trying to run several Sniffer
tests and take action on individual return codes rather than nonzero.
It is my understanding that Declude will only call the Sniffer test once
although numerous
PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: KITHRUP:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
That is about average, over 50% of our inbound mail fails at least one
test
(more like 70%)...
This is where the weighing system comes into play.
Tests like no postmaster and no abuse fail every message from
Monday, July 29, 2002 you wrote:
DL Anyone have any idea's on why they wouldn't have those addresses setup?
They don't set them up. My guess is because they handle too much
volume. I suspect it would take a significant staff to handle what
they would get in postmaster and abuse.
---
. What say you?
Jim Rooth
Klotron, Inc.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Todd Ryan
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 2:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
Jeff,
I just purchased Message Sniffer
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: KITHRUP:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
I would be interested in seeing what some of you have as myfilter.txt
list. I have been adding to mine and find it is a time consuming
experience to say the least. One that has been paying for itself
though. Being
: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
Jim, my filter file is rather large (almost 1600 entries and growing).
I
don't know if it is appropriate to post to the list, but I will send you
a
copy off-line, if you like.
Bill
-Original Message-
From: Jim Rooth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent
]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 4:08 PM
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
Just curious. How many people are using both Declude Junk Mail and
the
sniffer add-on and has it made a difference if yes. I have been
completely
pummeled with Spam and am looking for more options.
Thanks
- Original Message -
From: Tom Baker | Netsmith Inc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 3:14 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
Sniffer is great, Declude is great, they compliment each other great!
What is Sniffer?
---
[This E-mail
PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: KITHRUP:RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
That is about average, over 50% of our inbound mail fails at least one
test
(more like 70%)...
This is where the weighing system comes into play.
Tests like no postmaster and no abuse fail every message from
systems
like aol.com
Reply to: Jeff Kratka
Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer on Friday 3:08:26 PM
You will like Sniffer. Not only is it great at spam detection but
it is substantially faster than text based rules.
--
Roger Heath
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.rleeheath.com
- Copy of Original Message(s
Just curious. How many people are using both Declude Junk Mail and the
sniffer add-on and has it made a difference if yes. I have been completely
pummeled with Spam and am looking for more options.
Thanks.
Jeff
*
TymeWyse Internet
P.O.Box 84
! So
the trial isn't as effective as the commercial version since you can't
receive their updates ).
-Original Message-
From: Jeff Kratka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Declude and Sniffer
Just curious. How
13 matches
Mail list logo
