Thanks to everyone for the Perl suggestions. I ended up installing Strawberry
and having similar issues. I eventually discovered a mis-configured firewall
was blocking the .gz downloads! Once I fixed that everything started working.
Kinda embarrassing. I apologize for suggesting the script
On 12/3/2008, Hill, Brett ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> If you're talking about stripping off attachments for emails with
> viruses or malware, why would you want to give your users access to that
> content? Sounds pretty daring if you ask me.
thats not what I mean.
Of *course* this functionalit
Charles Marcus wrote:
> Actually, we are (or at least *I* am) talking about the
> ability to strip off (*not* simply block) attachments *and
> dump them into a web accessible directory somewhere*, *and
> add some text with a hyperlink to the attachment so the
> recipient can download it*.
I do
On 12/3/2008 6:54 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>> I'm NOT saying that attachment stripping 'belongs' here, I'm just
>> saying that if it can do it reliably, then it is a viable
>> candidate.
>>
>> I think Fritz already said he wasn't interested in such a feature, so
>> its a moot point anyway...
>
On 12/3/2008 6:41 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
>> I would *never* allow those through *any* mail system - but, to each
>> his/her own...
> why not? Are you blocking your users from downloading .exe from the
> internet too?
Yep... only admins can do that.
In my opinion, in a corporate environment,
GrayHat wrote:
> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for
> ASSP, all in all such a feature has nothing to do with junk
> email filtering :)
Just to add my 2 cents worth. I disagree. I use attachment stripping
in my environment. My firewall currently does it by way of prox
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>My comments re: ASSP being a viable candidate for the job of strpping
>attachments stands...
The text on the assp 2 site says:.
NEW FEATURES
- email interface for add/remove spamlovers
- cron-like scheduler for builtin-rebu
GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>I disagree; what you call "more than filtering" is just a "side
>effect"
>of some
>of the mechanisms used by ASSP to filter messages; on the other hand,
>stripping attachments or even blocking them by size isn't imVHo a job
>for
>ASSP, but for the backend MTA;
>I would *never* allow those through *any* mail system - but, to each
>his/her own...
why not? Are you blocking your users from downloading .exe from the
internet too?
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Mov
Questions and Answers for users of ASSP Anti-Spam SMTP Proxy
schreibt:
>I'm NOT saying that attachment stripping 'belongs' here, I'm just
>saying
>that if it can do it reliably, then it is a viable candidate.
>
>I think Fritz already said he wasn't interested in such a feature, so
>its a moot poin
On 12/3/2008, GrayHat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Exactly ! So, if you setup the MTA to refuse messages over a given size,
> the MTA will emit an SMTP error and you'll have your reject; I can't see
> where's the problem ! You aren't generating bounces, just rejecting the
> message due to "policy r
> But if the MTA is going to reject a message, that rejection should
occur
> at SMTP time.
Exactly ! So, if you setup the MTA to refuse messages over a given size,
the MTA will emit an SMTP error and you'll have your reject; I can't see
where's the problem ! You aren't generating bounces, just rej
On 12/3/2008, GrayHat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> what you call "more than filtering" is just a "side effect" of some
> of the mechanisms used by ASSP to filter messages;
I disagree...
CONVERTING one file type to another is certainly NOT a normal function
of an anti-spam filter - and as for it
>> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for ASSP, all
in
>> all such a feature has nothing to do with junk email filtering :)
> Neither does IETF conversion... this is why I proposed it - since ASSP
> is already doing more than junk mail filtering, *and* is the initial
> point o
On 12/3/2008 3:29 AM, GrayHat wrote:
> well; I don't think that stripping attachments is a job for ASSP, all in
> all such a feature has nothing to do with junk email filtering :)
Neither does IETF conversion... this is why I proposed it - since ASSP
is already doing more than junk mail filtering,
On 12/3/2008 3:57 AM, Fritz Borgstedt wrote:
> GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>> On the other hand, attachment *blocking* imVHo is good to have
>> and isn't "something from the past" :) consider that recent malware
>> mutates quickly, so an AV may not be able to detect a new variant
>> of a
> IMHO it is VERY outdated.
not totally :)
> I do not do it now for several years. I have NEVER experienced such a
> scenario.
in a quite recent past there were "waves" of malware pumped out by
bots, the attachments were quite small and their signatures changed
from message to message and for a
GrayHat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreibt:
>On the other hand, attachment *blocking* imVHo is good to have
>and isn't "something from the past" :) consider that recent malware
>mutates quickly, so an AV may not be able to detect a new variant
>of a given worm; this in turn means that blocking "executabl
> Duplicate attachments are a "big" problem at my day job, but
> other than attempting to train the end users to store the files on
> the network, and working off these files (at least when they are
> in the office), instead of emailing them back and forth, not much
> else I can do about it.
well;
19 matches
Mail list logo
