I'm curious as to why older versions of the min windows filter has
multiple segments of
if ($FoundVirus) {
...
}
in filter, filter_multipart, etc. Where as in 2.55 it is only in
filter_begin?
Any insights would be great.
TIA,
Dave
___
NOTE: If there
Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Rather than blocking the entire network (CIDR block) automatically, at
> least blacklisting
> the individual address for 3-5 days?
If I did that, I'd end up blocking Hotmail and MSN's servers more-or-less
permanently. While I might not think that's a Bad Thing, it's p
David F. Skoll wrote:
One other thing I thought about: what about detecting spammers, and
then looking up the CIDR block that their address belongs to, and adding
it to a blacklist automatically in filter_relay()?
Too many false-positives. We own a measly 8 IP addresses where our
colo bo
Alexander Dalloz wrote:
BTW: my SpamAssassin pukes at "use_terse_report 1". What version
does that apply to?
Pre SA 3.x
You may now use "remove_header all Report" to remove the verbose report.
Someone want to update the HOWTO installation instructions?
-Philip
__
Hmmm... I'm running a Linux shop here, so rarely does anyone send me
legitimately a .exe or .pif file. I was wondering about making the
following
change to the stock mimedefang-filter:
if (filter_bad_filename($entity)) {
md_graphdefang_log('bad_filename', $fname, $type);
# ret
Following up on this dusty old thread ... one idea that I'd mentioned was
perhaps using SPF as a way of validating IP relay addresses for whom
their mail should not be delayed via greylisting.
I noticed this in a mail header today:
X-Greylist: Sender is SPF-compliant, not delayed by milter-greyl
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> Does everyone use the built-in scoring, or do they write their own?
I use a combination of both (and I suspect most longtime MD/SA users do
also). Furthermore, in my local sa-mimedefang.cf file I have both
rulesets that I came up with, and so
--On Sunday, January 29, 2006 11:41 -0700 Philip Prindeville
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Also, instead of flagging spam, what about just rejecting the email in
filter_end() if SA reports too high a probability of it being spam?
Of course.
$names =~ s/,/ /g;
if ($hits >= 8.0) {
Is everybody ready for the next wave of viruses??
Kama Sutra worm set to bite next week...
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6031881.html
Meni
___
NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above
message, it is NULL AND VOID. You
Hi Matt
my company is now buying commercial license of nod32 for a customer so I
can replace the trial version I downloaded few days ago.
I'll try your patch asap and I'll send my feedback to the ML.
Tks
Giovanni
Matt Selsky wrote:
Just a few comments on this since I tried looking into nod32
10 matches
Mail list logo
