Cloudmark trialists wanted

[#1]

Those won't have been anywhere for a week, sent and delivered this morning. The reason they went via IronPort rather than Cloudmark appliances will be because the spammers are using cached DNS MX records and not current ones.
The sending date oddity demonstrates even the spammers can make mistakes.

[#2]

had another from the cload passed OK, ironport always marked s spam

Quote

Return-path: <connorsmum@aim.com> Envelope-to: mr@pierre.idps.co.uk Delivery-date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 09:58:31 +0100 Received: from [212.159.8.109] (helo=IMPCM2)   by inmx11.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1Qi0hj-0002TY-GN   for mr@pierre.idps.co.uk; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 09:58:31 +0100 Received: from ims-m13.mx.aol.com ([64.12.207.146]) by IMPCM2 with Plusnet Cloudmark Gateway id 8YyT1h0013A2yWQ01YyXV3; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 09:58:31 +0100 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=IVEYPan+IAS+JQAl7DnhK8moOKpmAJb6Wf2/uV1Zfig= c=1 sm=1 a=046mgvMoRZ8A:10 a=Wf7D_mFvtQ4A:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=iTRy1L03ebaF8mWTQleaCA==:17 a=JsonkgSlAAAA:8 a=QR6c8gT050PrALfbjKoA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=VSCYP9nJ_JwA:10 a=1qnTfwZG2IKCYeTZJMQMLg==:117 Received: from oms-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com (oms-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com [64.12.102.137]) by ims-m13.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p6G8wKv6006784; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:58:20 -0400 Received: from mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.9]) by oms-mb01.r1000.mx.aol.com (AOL Outbound OMS Interface) with ESMTP id D7B961C000085; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:58:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-moc003b.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-moc003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.195.10]) by mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id B13CCE000081; Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:58:20 -0400 (EDT) To: mr@pierre.idps.co.uk, nigel.doyle3@ntlworld.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-AOL-IP: 61.223.226.198 X-MB-Message-Type: User MIME-Version: 1.0 From: connorsmum@aim.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 33953-MOBILE Received: from 61.223.226.198 by Webmail-d120.sysops.aol.com (205.188.108.129) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:58:20 -0400 Message-Id: <8CE11ADA545AA2A-261C-6A1EF@Webmail-d120.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [61.223.226.198] Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2011 04:58:20 -0400 (EDT) x-aol-global-disposition: S X-SPAM-FLAG: YES X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:142936448:93952408  X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  X-AOL-REROUTE: YES x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d29094e2152ac7a58 X-PN-Virus-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00) X-PN-Spam-Filtered: by PlusNet MXCore (v5.00) Subject: X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 10.0.1390 [1516/3767] X-AVG-ID: ID45C09631-63C4F919 http://lagendadesurvie.com/inbox.php

[#3]

Morning folks,
Heads up that we've flipped everybody's DNS back to the IronPort platform, as we've enough data to be working with for the time being. Do shout up if anything odd happens over the coming 24 hours or so (it willo take time for things to propagate).

[#4]

Hi Bob,
Looked at this thread a bit late and realise that I am not clued up on spam removal. I note that others seem to have created a spam folder, presumably in their normal list of folders in their Squirrelmail display. I have ot done this. I also have found that, when I have reported emails as spam, they are always reported as successful but they never seem to be deleted. I am using Firefox 4/Ubuntu 10.04.2. Where have I gone wrong?
Incidentally I am finding that the normal webmail is much faster than it used to be which must mean that the remedial work on the routs has been OK.

[#5]

I know I am back on Ironport, 5 spam in there folder within an hour

[#6]

Quote from: colintivy

Looked at this thread a bit late and realise that I am not clued up on spam removal. I note that others seem to have created a spam folder, presumably in their normal list of folders in their Squirrelmail display.

Users don't create their spam folder, the system creates it when spam is first delivered to it.
Spam handling needs to be set up using the Spam tab within Manage My Mail under Email Settings in the Member Centre.
It's down to you what you do with misidentified spam. The system will not move it.

[#7]

Hi spraxyt!
Thanks for that. I have set things up as you suggest and await results. The lack of apparent activity when I specify something as spam in SquirrelMail and it is recognised as such still puzzles me. Can you elucidate please?
C.

[#8]

I am not a  believer of reporting spam, a lot of people report unwanted mail, this is not spam.
one of my worst ones appears to come from a facebook contact in france, the person whose name is on it I know personally and they havnt used that username for at least four year, that is spam.
but some others that have ended up in my spam box are from genuine company flier news letters