You might have just made a sale, my man. Excellent! Joseph Marlin
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] Who caught the latest virus before it caught their users? >I have not been able to filter .com's with IMail rules, because it "catches" >everyone who puts a .com email address in their signature or puts in a link, >etc. Even Watchguard (manufacturer of our Firebox) sent out a message saying >that their SMTP proxy service did not always catch this one because it used >UU-encoding. Ouch -- uuencoding is a fairly standard encoding method. >Does anyone have a good rule to catch only .com attachments? Or did Declude >catch it? Yes, Declude caught it without any problems, if used with a virus scanner that could detect it. And Declude can be set up to ban .com attachments if you want (and ONLY com attachments -- it won't block E-mails with ".com" somewhere in it, unless it's as a file name). Also, the new Declude Virus Pro (just about to go into beta) would have caught it as a "Hidden EXE file". -Scott Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html to be removed from this list. An Archive of this list is available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
