Hello,
On Thursday, 7. August 2008 15:48:21 Mark Martinec wrote:
On our amavisd-new box:
Jul 30 16:36:42 mail kernel: [608438.105690] lha[700]: segfault at
bfcf4d55
...
Yes.
Any crash caused by data over which one has no control
is a potential security risk and a cause for
Terve Jussi,
On Wednesday, 5. November 2008 14:34:23 Mark Martinec wrote:
I am in discussions with F-Secure about this, but I would want to ask you
Amavis people, if I could solve this (at least temporarily) by adjusting
the amavisd.conf.
Here's a little trick to help your F-Secure setup.
On Wednesday, 16. July 2008 17:02:29 Stefan Jakobs wrote:
I use postfix 2.4.3 with amavisd-new 2.5.4 and spamassassin 3.2.2.
I received a mail which amavisd couldn't finish processing. I guess it is a
spamassassin problem, but to be sure I ask here also.
There is a known issue with
Hello Mark,
On Friday, 25. May 2007, Mark Martinec wrote:
- avoid repeatedly reporting the same set of modules by a log entry
'extra modules loaded:', only report it on changes to the list;
repeated reports could be misinterpreted that modules were loaded
with each mail task, where
Mark,
On Tuesday, 29. May 2007, Mark Martinec wrote:
Is there a way to automatically load these modules?
Unfortunately these three or four modules need to be
available for each child process startup and are read then
as needed (depending on characters that need to be processed).
These are
to port it
to a new amavisd version in the near future.
Best regards,
Thomas Jarosch
-
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your
Hello Mark,
attached is a small patch to work around an old rpm2cpio version bug.
Reading the rpm file from stdin fails on RPM 3.0.x with
cannot re-open payload: Success. As result rpm packages
get passed unscanned.
Luckily the filename can be passed as argument to rpm2cpio,
so it can easily be
Hello Mark,
thanks for your reply.
On Saturday 12 November 2005 02:01, you wrote:
Limitations:
* Doesn't work on a per recipient basis, if a banned attachment
is found for one recipient, it get's banned for all.
This one is quite a serious one, it makes mail delivery inconsistent.
It
Hello,
here is a patch to replace banned attachments with a text notice.
Guess a lot of people are going to be happy :-)
Features:
* Replace banned attachments with notice of your choice
* Bans root/source attachment for compressed archives
* Original message gets quarantined for later
Aury,
[mail from offlist]
On Monday 07 November 2005 22:08, you wrote:
Great job, Thomas !
I recently asked for it to Mark ... one suggestion... Can it be
integrated with LDAP/SQL? The warnbannedrecip can be used for it.
The banned filename lookup code is unchanged, so it should already
work
On Monday 27 June 2005 21:56, Mark Martinec wrote:
when forwarding all spam mails to a single destination,
existing X-Spam-* headers don't get deleted.
Hm, are sure? With a Postfix (dual-MTA) setup?
I'm not seeing it here.
Here's why: check_mail() calls do_spam() before the first
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 11:21, Mark Martinec wrote:
Perhaps you are examining quarantined mail, not a forwarded mail?
True, I looked at a quarantined mail. Thought an smtp quarantine was
the natural way to forward all spam emails to a single destination, isn't
it?
Quarantined messages
Hello Mark,
when forwarding all spam mails to a single destination,
existing X-Spam-* headers don't get deleted.
Here's why: check_mail() calls do_spam() before the first
add_forwarding_header_edits_common() call is done.
Is this by design?
Cheers,
Thomas
13 matches
Mail list logo
