Re: [Mimedefang] filter_bad_filename based on recipient

2016-09-19 Thread Marcus Schopen
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 08:57 -0400 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:48:16 +0200 > Marcus Schopen wrote: > > > is it possible to define $bad_exts in sub filter_bad_filename based on > > domain name? I'd like to filter ".docm"-attachments, but not globally > > for all domains on t

Re: [Mimedefang] filter_bad_filename based on recipient

2016-09-19 Thread Benoit Panizzon
Hi > is it possible to define $bad_exts in sub filter_bad_filename based on > domain name? I'd like to filter ".docm"-attachments, but not globally > for all domains on that server, just for my private domain. Seems to > be that $recipient is not known in sub filter_bad_filename? Sure it is. You

Re: [Mimedefang] filter_bad_filename based on recipient

2016-09-19 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 14:48:16 +0200 Marcus Schopen wrote: > is it possible to define $bad_exts in sub filter_bad_filename based on > domain name? I'd like to filter ".docm"-attachments, but not globally > for all domains on that server, just for my private domain. Seems to > be that $recipient is

Re: [Mimedefang] clamav-unofficial-sigs and pyzor

2016-09-19 Thread Marcus Schopen
Am Montag, den 19.09.2016, 08:36 -0400 schrieb Dianne Skoll: > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 07:46:11 +0200 > Marcus Schopen wrote: > > > my be a little bit off topic, but are there any experience with the > > efficiency of pyzor and clamav-unofficial-sigs [1]. > > No comment on pyzor because I don't use

[Mimedefang] filter_bad_filename based on recipient

2016-09-19 Thread Marcus Schopen
Hi, is it possible to define $bad_exts in sub filter_bad_filename based on domain name? I'd like to filter ".docm"-attachments, but not globally for all domains on that server, just for my private domain. Seems to be that $recipient is not known in sub filter_bad_filename? Ciao! ___

Re: [Mimedefang] clamav-unofficial-sigs and pyzor

2016-09-19 Thread Dianne Skoll
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 07:46:11 +0200 Marcus Schopen wrote: > my be a little bit off topic, but are there any experience with the > efficiency of pyzor and clamav-unofficial-sigs [1]. No comment on pyzor because I don't use it, but some of the clamav-unofficial-sigs are useful. We use the followin

Re: [Mimedefang] clamav-unofficial-sigs and pyzor

2016-09-19 Thread Richard Laager
On 09/19/2016 01:48 AM, Marcus Schopen wrote: > Did you activate all signatures > or just e.g. sanesecurity sigs? I read activating all signatures turns > clamav into an evil memory monster, while only activating sanesecurity > sigs catches most and doesn't need that much resources. I don't adjust