Hello everyone,
the attachment level definitions are subject to be obsolet (removed) in a
future release. Only 'UserAttach' will be available.
I know, 'UserAttach' can currently be hard to manage - for example in
large environments.
What are my plans for this?
- named policies (templates) can be defined - like: ~policyname => block
=> bla|blaa , .......
- policies can be used any where - like : zip:a...@domain.com =>
%policyname%
- policies can be joined - like: :a...@domain.com => %policy1%|%policy2%
Where I'm not sure - is it useable to implement a configurable inheritance
functionality.
* => policy1
*@domain.com => policy2|policy3
us...@domain.com => policy4
(-i)us...@domain.com => policy4
(-i)*@otherdomain.com => policy2|policy5
us...@otherdomain.com => policy6
If per default inheritance is enabled. The resulting configurations for
each of the above lines would be:
* => policy1
*@domain.com => policy1|policy2|policy3
us...@domain.com => policy1|policy2|policy3|policy4
us...@domain.com => policy4
*@otherdomain.com => policy2|policy5
us...@otherdomain.com => policy2|policy5|policy6
Or is it more practicable to have the inheritance switched off per default
and it must be enabled for each line in question (i) ? (I prever the first
variant - inheritance on per default)
* => policy1
(i)*@domain.com => policy2|policy3
(i)us...@domain.com => policy4
us...@domain.com => policy4
*@otherdomain.com => policy2|policy5
(i)us...@otherdomain.com => policy6
And the last question - should it be possible to define dependencies for
the different assp mail flags (whitelisted and noprocessing). like:
(-i wl np)*@otherdomain.com => policy2|policy5
where (-i wl np) will be interpreted as : inheritance OFF, applies to
whitelisted and noprocessing senders only
Any suggestion on this?
Thomas
Von: K Post <nntp.p...@gmail.com>
An: ASSP development mailing list <assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net>
Datum: 14.08.2017 15:22
Betreff: Re: [Assp-test] More PDF Javascript catches
As always, I appreciate your input. I feared this was going to be your
response. Most of these erroneously blocked mails come from big providers
(like travel agency confirmation pdfs). I'm surprised that they have
javascript, but they do. We've been adding exceptions, which isn't fun,
but is okay.
Do you think there's a way you could change UserAttach, or add another
exception list, to let us use variables like %LEVEL2% to indicate all of
the Level 2 defined types and then use + or - notation to add or remove
types? That would let us change Level2 in the GUI and not have to then go
through all of the UserAttach exceptions and update them too.
So something like this:
Our Level 1 is
exe\-bin|url|ade|adp|asx|bas|bat|dot|dotx|xlt|xlts|bin|chm|cmd|com|cpl|crt|dbx|dll|exe|hlp|hta|htb|inf|ifs|isp|js|jse|lnk|mda|mdb|mde|mdz|mht|msc|msi|msp|mst|nch|pcd|pif|prf|ps1|reg|scf|scr|sct|shb|shs|vb|vbe|vbs|vba|wms|wsc|wsh|rar|dotm|docm|xlsm|pptm
Our Level 2 is
(exe\-bin|url|ade|adp|asx|bas|bat|dot|dotx|xlt|xlts|bin|chm|cmd|com|cpl|crt|dbx|dll|exe|hlp|hta|htb|inf|ifs|isp|js|jse|lnk|mda|mdb|mde|mdz|mht|msc|msi|msp|mst|nch|pcd|pif|prf|ps1|reg|scf|scr|sct|shb|shs|vb|vbe|vbs|vba|wms|wsc|wsh|rar|dotm|docm|xlsm|pptm).zip
This user needs to ALLOW office macros
ouru...@ourcharity.org => block => exe\-bin|:MSOM|
url|ade|adp|asx|bas|bat|dot|dotx|xlt|xlts|bin|chm|cmd|com|cpl|crt|dbx|dll|exe|hlp|hta|htb|inf|ifs|isp|js|jse|lnk|mda|mdb|mde|mdz|mht|msc|msi|msp|mst|nch|pcd|pif|prf|ps1|reg|scf|scr|sct|shb|shs|vb|vbe|vbs|vba|wms|wsc|wsh|rar|dotm|xlsm
My proposal would be to instead have something like
ouru...@ourcharity.org => block => %Leve2%|+:MSOM (add the :MSOM
exception)
Just a thought. Thanks
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Thomas Eckardt <
thomas.ecka...@thockar.com> wrote:
One line of bad JS code is enough to completely destroy an IT environment
(petabytes of data and thousands of machines in some minutes).
Such code can be encrypted, encoded and obviuscated in any not thinkable
way.
It is simply not possible to classify JS code or to know how any of the
hundreds PDF viewers will act on such code.
Accepting executable code from a sender is not a matter of classification
- it is a matter of TRUST ! (I trust no one without human code
verification)
Define ':CERTPDF' and request the sender to sign there PDF files.
For now, assp only checks that there is a certificated. In a future
release the certificates may be verified and/or compared to a provided
CERT-list.
Thomas
Von: K Post <nntp.p...@gmail.com>
An: ASSP development mailing list <assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net>
Datum: 09.08.2017 15:54
Betreff: [Assp-test] More PDF Javascript catches
I really like the javascript detection in PDF files, but I've seen lots of
false positives too.
I keep meaning to report it. One file that just got caught has only 2
lines of javascript
6 0 obj
<</S/JavaScript/JS(this.zoom = 100;)>>
endobj
and
33 0 obj
<</Dests 31 0 R/JavaScript 32 0 R>>
endobj
Is there anything more that could be done to be less aggressive but still
give us good protection?
Thanks!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the
individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
