It looks like the file name is in the MIME segment headers in
quoted-printable format (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?). I am going to assume that
Declude isn't parsing quoted printable in the file names based on your
log line. I would report this to Declude support as this would
definitely be a shortcoming.
Need some help for a part time sys admin!
Declude Virus/Junkmail Standard 2.0.6.16/F-prot.
We have very limited bandwidth so have expanded the banned extensions list in virus.cfg
to include .mpg, .mpeg, .wmv, etc. This works well but there seems to be
some that are still slipping thr
> Are you running a version of IMail prior to 8.0?
Currently running 8.05
> Do you see Declude Virus log file entries for one of those E-mails?
Only the ones sent from the mail client are showing up in the Declude Virus
logs at all and then are blocked, but they are all in the SMTP logs.
- Andy
I have zip files set as a banned extension and they do get blocked (incoming
and outgoing) when they are sent from a true mail client. When zips are
sent from webmail, they get by the banned extension list. I believe this is
normal behavior but I'm wondering why that is. If I don't want to allo
I searched the archives and I think I found the answer to my question but I
want to make sure I understand how this works.
I have zip files set as a banned extension and they do get blocked (incoming
and outgoing) when they are sent from a true mail client. When zips are
sent from webmail, they
/Owner
eServices For You
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus]
Banned Extensions at Bechtel
I'm torn between "ultimate virus
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions at Bechtel
>
> Todd, feeling OK today? Problems at the office? It is just a file,
just a
> lowly little file. It was never meant to spark such enthusiasm. Wow.
And
> my
> wife says I over react. ;)
>
> John Tolm
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday,
January 28, 2004
4:18 PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
[Declude.Virus]
Banned Extensions at Bechtel
This list is
generated from Microsoft's default
exclusions in Outlook (the $500 billion virus solution is
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 6:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions at Bechtel
I'm torn between "ultimate virus protection" and not inhibiting users.
My thoughts in blocking things like SCR and PIF fi
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Lee Heath
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 6:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions at Bechtel
>
>
> Thought some here would find this interesting. This is the
> banned extensions at Bechtel.. the prominent i
]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus]
Banned Extensions at Bechtel
This list is generated from Microsoft's default
exclusions in Outlook (the $500 billion virus solution is to turn off all
executable attachments...)
I'm not a fan of going overboard here, especially with things that I don't
u
TECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Holt
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:22 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions at Bechtel
>
> They think they are being so intelligent. Idiots.
>
> Sending a VB class
This list is generated from Microsoft's default exclusions in Outlook
(the $500 billion virus solution is to turn off all executable
attachments...)
I'm not a fan of going overboard here, especially with things that I
don't understand where they might be used (and I'm well aware that
others di
es.
Todd Holt
Xidix Technologies, Inc
Las Vegas, NV USA
www.xidix.com
702.319.4349
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Lee Heath
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 4:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
CTED]
> Subject: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions at Bechtel
>
> Thought some here would find this interesting. This is the banned
> extensions at Bechtel.. the prominent information resource... and
> their responder message.
>
> > File(s): document.scr
> >
> > Matching fi
Thought some here would find this interesting. This is the banned
extensions at Bechtel.. the prominent information resource... and
their responder message.
> File(s): document.scr
>
> Matching filename: *.scr
>
> Your attachment did not reach the intended recipient. To protect Bechtel's
> netwo
>I have received 2 notices of e-mails failing the banned extensions
>policy in the last two days.
>
>The problem is that there is no extension is listed.
That shouldn't happen, but:
>06/27/2002 10:52:01 Q50c0092b008a147a Scanned: Banned file extension.
>[Prescan OK][UU: 0 0][BINHEX: 0 0][MIME:
>We had the same thing happen a couple weeks ago. The customer was
sending an
>HTML email that was a web page on another server. The HTML called an
EXE
>file in it and was rejected.
>At least I assume that was the reason... the customer sent the link
instead
>and had no problems so I ignored the
PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Rick Davidson
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 11:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] Banned extensions
is it possible there is a line in your virus.cfg that looks like this:
SKIPEXT
with no extension listed?
it would probly trigger on a file with no extension
;John Tolmachoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 2:26 PM
Subject: [Declude.Virus] Banned extensions
I have received 2 notices of e-mails failing the banned extensions
policy in the last two days.
The problem is that there is no extensio
> I have received 2 notices of e-mails failing the banned extensions
> policy in the last two days.
We had the same thing happen a couple weeks ago. The customer was sending an
HTML email that was a web page on another server. The HTML called an EXE
file in it and was rejected.
At least I assume
I have received 2 notices of e-mails failing the banned extensions
policy in the last two days.
The problem is that there is no extension is listed.
Delivery Failed: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The mail server for quest-comp.com does not accept E-mail with
attachments that contain the extension.
This p
ectory for your domain
or in a user's mailbox directory.
--
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 4:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Declude.Virus] Banned Extensions
Scott,
We host multi
23 matches
Mail list logo
