RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:59:45 -0800

Title: Message
Yes, they are passing SNIFFER and Darrell's INV-URIBL at this time.  But what Evans wrote is true.  Either this "spammer" has corrected "his" image.. the fact remains that in the past when it was a corrupted; Declude failed in our version.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colbeck, Andrew
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 7:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

Ditto.
 
I've received and held 24 messages with the same title.  Re-queuing 3 of these to myself, they had an image that was intact.
 
They fail the usual RBL tests plus Message Sniffer.
 
Andrew 8)
 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harry Vanderzand
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 10:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

Judgement is quick to pass for some around here.
 
These are getting caught by my system
 
X-Note: Spam Tests Failed: SBL [28], SORBS-DUHL [4], HELOBOGUS [3], SNIFFER [13]
 

Harry Vanderzand
inTown Internet & Computer Services
519-741-1222

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erik
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 12:49 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

The problem that we've seen this "spammer" is that the image is corrupted as you mentioned... and Declude is exiting; thus why it's being allowed to be delivered. "Smart" coding on the spammer... Not so smart on Declude.

-Erik

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Beckstrom
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 6:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

We’re getting the same.  Also using Declude with smartermail.  Because Declude doesn’t appear to be scanning the headers there is no way for us to stop them.

 

 

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Evans Martin
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 12:38 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] Damaged Image Files

 

I’m getting a lot of messages that have only a graphic in them.  The graphic appears to have been damaged as only about ½ of it displays.  Declude has not modified the headers at all so I’m not sure if these are being scanned or not.  I don’t know how it could be bypassing Declude.  I have attached the .msg file.  Anyone have any ideas what might be causing this?

 

I’m running Declude 3.0.5.22 and SmarterMail 2.6.

 

 

The header is as follows:

 

Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tue Feb 28 00:24:32 2006

Received: from 225-65-10-72.planters.net [72.10.65.225] by matrix.martek.net with SMTP;

   Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:24:32 -0600

Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 01:24:22 +0100

Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

From: "Abrahams"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Subject: C1alis 10 Pills 20 mg $89.95

Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

MIME-Version: 1.0

Content-Type: multipart/related;

            type="multipart/alternative";

            boundary="------------ms020700070106060404020304"

X-Priority: 3

X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180

 

 

Thanks,

Evans Martin

 

EVANS MARTIN  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

HOSTING:  http://www.martek.net

PROGRAMMING:  http://www.martekware.com

 

iPlus Info Browser – IPB’s IMail Migration Tool, password browser, reporting suite make IPlus Info Browser something no IMail administrator should be without.  http://www.martek.net/Default.aspx?tabid=96

 

Reply via email to