1 PM
Subject: RE: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Darin, let me put it plainly.
If you put "WHITELIST AUTH" line in the Global.cfg file any user the sends
out through your server via smt
ginal Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin
Cox
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 8:20 AM
> To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
> Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude
> allows attachments and Virus to pass th
Darin
Cox
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:20 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Ahh, so I was correct. SMTP AUTH is still an issue. That in itse
RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
> The Auto whitelist IMail 2006 is the issue I was referring to a few days
ago
> in regards to wanting users that SMTP AUTH to be whitelisted. Were you
were
> saying that this was wor
:20 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Ahh, so I was correct. SMTP AUTH is still an issue. That in itself is a
showstopper for us to move to IMail
> The Auto whitelist IMail 2006 is the issue I was referring to a few days
ago
> in regards to wanting users that SMTP AUTH to be whitelisted. Were you
were
> saying that this was working with 2006 and Declude 4.x?
"WHITELIST AUTH" line in the Global.cfg is working as expected.
The Auto Whitelis
om: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin
Cox
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 10:44 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanne
@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
John T,
The Auto whitelist IMail 2006 is the issue I was referring to a few days ago
in regards to wanting users that SMTP AUTH to be whitelisted
AIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 10:35 AM
Subject: RE: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Here is a preliminary list, not all have been verified and several are
currently
ctober 23, 2006 10:35 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Thanks, David. We appreciate your efforts.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: &quo
06 12:43 PM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: RE: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Hi Mark,
Yes to a certain extent we are checking for no standard line terminators,
however this problem is
, October 24, 2006 12:40 PM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: RE: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
So does the NONSTANDARDHDR vulnerability test protect us from both of these
problems?
Mark
: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
David,
Thanks to both you and the other Dave for taking another look at this.
Matt
David Barker wrote:
> Darin,
>
> Our
ubject: RE: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Hi All,
I said in my original email that Declude had been notified of LF only issue.
I just looked back through my email and found the report. It was D
October 23, 2006 10:19 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Thanks, David. We appreciate your input.
Is it feasible to post a list of known issues and
: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Thanks, David. We appreciate your input.
Is it feasible to post a list of known issues and/or issues being worked? I
realize
IL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin
Cox
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:38 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
David Barker, Can y
: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:38 AM
To: declude.junkmail@declude.com
Subject: Re: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
David Barker, Can you tell us the status of this old case? What progress
has been
E: SPAM-WARN: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] RE: On RFC Violation -
Declude allows attachments and Virus to pass through untouched and unscanned
Hi All,
I said in my original email that Declude had been notified of LF only issue.
I just looked back through my email and found the report. It was Declude
case [06D-0
Hi All,
I said in my original email that Declude had been notified of LF only issue.
I just looked back through my email and found the report. It was Declude
case [06D-0BBF1866-F5A3] on Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:29:58 -0500.
Michael Thomas
Mathbox
978-683-6718
1-877-MATHBOX (Toll Free)
---
This E-
20 matches
Mail list logo
