gmane.mail.exim.exiscan.user archive

393 archived articles, newest first (page 4 of 4). Latest articles →

Re: clamd
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:10:36 -0600
Lance <[email protected]> • #2092
Re: clamd
Tue, 12 Oct 2004 06:58:37 +0200
Adrian Phillips <[email protected]> • #2091
Re: clamd
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 21:14:12 -0600
Lance <[email protected]> • #2090
Re: clamd
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:33:34 -0400
Dave Baker <[email protected]> • #2089
clamd
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:57:35 -0600
Lance <[email protected]> • #2088
Re: exiscan not finding some W32/MyDoom-O viruses
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:21:56 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2087
Re: exiscan not finding some W32/MyDoom-O viruses
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:24:08 +0200
"Peter Rindfuss" <[email protected]> • #2086
exiscan not finding some W32/MyDoom-O viruses
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:48:38 +0100
Nigel Wade <[email protected]> • #2085
Re: ExiScan not working with SA 3
Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:50:01 +0300 (EEST)
"Adrian Costin" <[email protected]> • #2084
Re: SpamAssassin 3.0 Released
Sat, 9 Oct 2004 03:44:37 +0000 (UTC)
Lance <[email protected]> • #2083
Re: ExiScan not working with SA 3
Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:41:13 +0200
Jakob Hirsch <[email protected]> • #2082
ExiScan not working with SA 3
Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:28:41 +0300 (EEST)
"Adrian Costin" <[email protected]> • #2081
Re: leftovers in .../scan directory
Fri, 08 Oct 2004 09:03:54 +0200
Frank Elsner <[email protected]> • #2080
leftovers in .../scan directory
Thu, 07 Oct 2004 21:43:42 +0200
Frank Elsner <[email protected]> • #2079
exiscan-acl-4.43-28
Thu, 07 Oct 2004 09:18:17 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2078
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:24:05 -0400
Dave Baker <[email protected]> • #2077
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
Scott Call <[email protected]> • #2076
Re: newbie: demime problem
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:45:19 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2075
Re: newbie: demime problem
Wed, 29 Sep 2004 13:55:18 +1000
"Jeff" <[email protected]> • #2074
Re: newbie: demime problem
Tue, 28 Sep 2004 19:40:11 -0700
moron <[email protected]> • #2073
newbie: demime problem
Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:26:08 -0700 (PDT)
[email protected] • #2072
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Sat, 25 Sep 2004 22:43:56 +0100 (BST)
"Richard.Hall" <[email protected]> • #2071
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Sat, 25 Sep 2004 13:25:17 -0700 (PDT)
Scott Call <[email protected]> • #2070
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Sat, 25 Sep 2004 15:18:17 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2069
Re: no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:56:03 -0400
Dave Baker <[email protected]> • #2068
no_mbox_unspool on errors only?
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 18:47:14 -0700 (PDT)
Scott Call <[email protected]> • #2067
Re: SpamAssassin 3.0 Released
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 15:21:31 -0700
"Rich, Whidbey Telecom NOC" <[email protected]> • #2066
Re: SpamAssassin 3.0 Released
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:31:57 +0100
jzaw <[email protected]> • #2065
SpamAssassin 3.0 Released
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 08:13:32 -0700
"Rich, Whidbey Telecom NOC" <[email protected]> • #2064
Re: SpamAssassin 3.0 Released
Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:38:35 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2063
FWD: undefined reference to main
Tue, 21 Sep 2004 10:53:25 -0400
"Michael F. Sprague" <[email protected]> • #2062
undefined reference to main
Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:05:50 -0400
"Michael F. Sprague" <[email protected]> • #2061
Re: clamav - temporarily rejected after data
Sat, 18 Sep 2004 10:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
Doug Jolley <[email protected]> • #2060
Re: clamav - temporarily rejected after data
Sat, 18 Sep 2004 06:41:51 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2059
clamav - temporarily rejected after data
Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Doug Jolley <[email protected]> • #2058
Re: header_pos_top
Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:32:07 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2057
header_pos_top
Thu, 16 Sep 2004 20:07:59 +0200
David <[email protected]> • #2056
drwebd > version-4.30 and exiscan, something changed
Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:37:19 +0200
Matthias Hank <[email protected]> • #2055
Re: regex - in a file?
Thu, 9 Sep 2004 06:43:49 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2054
regex - in a file?
Thu, 9 Sep 2004 11:33:57 +1000
Lawrence Ong <[email protected]> • #2053
Re: Re: Re: Problem with SPF when more than 1 "to" recipients (was: Problem with SPFwith cc ?)
Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:24:01 +0200
[email protected] • #2052
Re: Problem with SPF when more than 1 "to" recipients (was: Problem with SPF with cc ?)
Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:00:13 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2051
Re: Re: Problem with SPF when more than 1 "to" recipients (was: Problem with SPFwith cc ?)
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 17:12:42 +0200
[email protected] • #2050
Re: Problem with SPF when more than 1 "to" recipients (was: Problem with SPFwith cc ?)
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 14:20:01 -0000 (GMT)
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2049
Problem with SPF with cc ?
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 15:18:13 +0200
[email protected] • #2048
Problem with SPF when more than 1 "to" recipients (was: Problem with SPF with cc ?)
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 15:24:43 +0200
[email protected] • #2047
Re: Compiling Exim with the Exiscan Patch
Mon, 6 Sep 2004 08:15:54 -0000 (GMT)
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2046
Re: Compiling Exim with the Exiscan Patch
Mon, 06 Sep 2004 10:20:59 +0700
"Fajar A. Nugraha" <[email protected]> • #2045
Compiling Exim with the Exiscan Patch
Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:09:48 -0700 (PDT)
Doug Jolley <[email protected]> • #2044
Re: Re: SRS on Exim: alias not set properly?
Tue, 31 Aug 2004 17:07:07 +0100 (BST)
Chris Edwards <[email protected]> • #2043
Re: SRS on Exim: alias not set properly?
Tue, 31 Aug 2004 08:13:10 -0700
"Rich, WhidbeyNET NOC" <[email protected]> • #2042
Re: SRS forward on Exim?
Tue, 31 Aug 2004 11:36:42 +0100 (BST)
Dr Andrew C Aitchison <[email protected]> • #2041
SRS forward on Exim?
Mon, 30 Aug 2004 10:07:49 -0700
"Rich, WhidbeyNET NOC" <[email protected]> • #2040
Re: multi profile config
Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:15:47 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2039
Re: multi profile config
Mon, 30 Aug 2004 14:09:11 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2038
Re: $found_extension variable no longer in use?
Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:29:48 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2036
$found_extension variable no longer in use?
Fri, 27 Aug 2004 16:03:55 -0600
Jim Savoy <[email protected]> • #2035
exiscan-acl-4.42-27
Fri, 27 Aug 2004 12:10:32 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2034
Re: zlib 1.2.1?
Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:00:06 +0200
Dennis Freise <[email protected]> • #2033
zlib 1.2.1?
Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:24:57 -0400
Dennis Skinner <[email protected]> • #2032
different messages
Wed, 25 Aug 2004 16:27:09 +0100 (BST)
"j.linn" <[email protected]> • #2031
Re: SPF ...
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:29:41 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2030
SPF ...
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:09:34 +0200
David <[email protected]> • #2029
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:35:07 +0300
Igor Karpov <[email protected]> • #2028
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 13:13:42 +0300
Igor Karpov <[email protected]> • #2027
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:53:36 +0100 (BST)
Chris Edwards <[email protected]> • #2026
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:30:50 +0200
Oliver Eikemeier <[email protected]> • #2025
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 10:21:13 +0300
Igor Karpov <[email protected]> • #2022
Re: [exiscanusers] Announce: exiscan-acl-4.41-25
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:09:42 +0800
"rtm" <[email protected]> • #2021
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:40:40 +0200
Oliver Eikemeier <[email protected]> • #2020
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 22:27:51 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2019
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 16:56:52 -0400
Steven Dickenson <[email protected]> • #2018
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 21:48:24 +0200
Oliver Eikemeier <[email protected]> • #2016
Re: Announce: exiscan-acl-4.41-25
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 20:18:57 +0200 (CEST)
"Thomas Stein" <[email protected]> • #2015
Announce: exiscan-acl-4.41-25
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 17:13:03 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2014
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 15:41:09 +0200
Oliver Eikemeier <[email protected]> • #2013
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:34:21 -0000 (GMT)
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2012
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:00:41 +0100 (BST)
Chris Edwards <[email protected]> • #2011
Re: Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 11:16:32 +0200
[email protected] • #2010
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:09:29 -0000 (GMT)
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2009
Re: exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:46:39 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2008
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Wed, 18 Aug 2004 09:55:00 +0200
Tom Kistner <[email protected]> • #2007
Re: Which ACLs to use
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 22:09:45 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2006
Re: Which ACLs to use
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:03:17 -0400
Dave Baker <[email protected]> • #2005
Which ACLs to use
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:24:43 -0400
"Michael F. Sprague" <[email protected]> • #2004
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 18:57:21 +0100
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #2003
RE: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:58:15 +0200
"Oliver Polterauer" <[email protected]> • #2002
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:19:27 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
Chris Wakelin <[email protected]> • #2001
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:50:33 +0200
[email protected] • #2000
exiscan & spf: the same problem.
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:52:56 +0300
Igor Karpov <[email protected]> • #1999
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 16:00:47 +0100
Mike Grice <[email protected]> • #1998
Re: silently discarding infected messages
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 07:58:07 -0700 (MST)
"Kevin Reed" <[email protected]> • #1997
Re: Multiple malware scanners
Tue, 17 Aug 2004 15:09:29 -0000 (GMT)
"Peter Bowyer" <[email protected]> • #1996
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.