[Declude.Virus] SKIPIFFORGING

2003-09-19 Thread Jeff Kratka
Scott, Hopefully not to dumb of a question. In the virus config there is the line FORGINGVIRUSvirus name which can be added and also SKIPIFVIRUSNAMEHAS on the *.eml files. Do they do the same thing? Can it be just added to the virus config file to skip the mail being sent out and removed

Re: [Declude.Virus] Question on banned attachemnt

2003-09-19 Thread Bob McGregor
I just check the D*.SMD file and it appears to have an atatchment content-type=application/x-msdwonload;name=qnlc.exe followed by attachment info. On Friday, September 19, 2003 11:18 AM, John Tolmachoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have seen a couple of those. If you look at the body, the

RE: [Declude.Virus] Question on banned attachemnt

2003-09-19 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
I have seen a couple of those. If you look at the body, the attachment is not actually there, although the mime header for it is. John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus-

Re: [Declude.Virus] SKIPIFFORGING

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Hopefully not to dumb of a question. In the virus config there is the line FORGINGVIRUSvirus name which can be added and also SKIPIFVIRUSNAMEHAS on the *.eml files. Do they do the same thing? No. SKIPIFVIRUSNAMEHAS tells Declude Virus not to send out a specific .eml file for certain

[Declude.Virus] SKIPIFVIRUSNAMEHAS

2003-09-19 Thread Jeff Kratka
Disregard my last message. If I had opened my eyes and read all my mail first I would have see the answer. Jeff Kratka * TymeWyse Internet P.O.Box 84 - 110 Ecklund St., Canyonville, OR 97417 tel/fax: (541) 839-6027 - [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Declude.Virus] Declude Virus v1.76 (beta) released

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is it my imagination or is the new Declude beeping? I think I am getting a server that beeps every so often with the new version? I put back 1.75 and now there are no beeps? You are correct -- this has been fixed; there is a 1.76b at http://www.declude.com/release/176/declude.exe that fixes

Re[2]: [Declude.Virus] OT - Alert lists.

2003-09-19 Thread David Sullivan
Hello Pete, Friday, September 12, 2003, 2:27:22 PM, you wrote: PM * Some systems do not have server based virus scanning. Unwise but in some cases reality. PM * We *may* be able to respond more quickly than some anti-virus PM companies. Yep, most likely. PM * Non-viable versions of viruses

[Declude.Virus] WHITELIST ANYWHERE not working?

2003-09-19 Thread Andy Schmidt
Hi Scott: I had defined WHITELIST ANYWHERE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yet, that only seems to whitelist messages coming FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] - all messages sent TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] are not whitelisted: 09/19/2003 12:54:59 Q34e0014201a66fbf HELOBOGUS:3 HEUR10:4 WEIGHTFILTER:3 . Total weight =

RE: [Declude.Virus] WHITELIST ANYWHERE not working?

2003-09-19 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
I believe this is a JunkMail question. :)) Kidding aside, I think the ANYWHERE is only good in the filter files. John Tolmachoff MCSE CSSA Engineer/Consultant eServices For You www.eservicesforyou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus- [EMAIL

RE: [Declude.Virus] New variant of Swen, or something else?

2003-09-19 Thread Todd Holt
Is this what causes a banned attachment (bannotify.eml) message to be sent with no attachment name? We are getting a lot of these to postmaster at a number of domains that we support. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL

Re: [Declude.Virus] WHITELIST ANYWHERE not working?

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
I had defined WHITELIST ANYWHERE [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yet, that only seems to whitelist messages coming FROM [EMAIL PROTECTED] - all messages sent TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] are not whitelisted: Does [EMAIL PROTECTED] appear in the headers or body of the E-mail? Are there any spaces/tabs after

RE: [Declude.Virus] New variant of Swen, or something else?

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Is this what causes a banned attachment (bannotify.eml) message to be sent with no attachment name? We are getting a lot of these to postmaster at a number of domains that we support. The bannotify.eml file doesn't have the ability to display the attachment name, just the extension.

RE: [Declude.Virus] New variant of Swen, or something else?

2003-09-19 Thread Todd Holt
It actually displays: You have sent an attachment with the .[Unknown Var] extension. What causes this? Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry

RE: [Declude.Virus] New variant of Swen, or something else?

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
It actually displays: You have sent an attachment with the .[Unknown Var] extension. What causes this? That means that you are using a variable that your version of Declude Virus doesn't understand. For example, if you use %MADEUP% in the .eml file, it will replace it with [Unknown Var]. It

RE: [Declude.Virus] New variant of Swen, or something else?

2003-09-19 Thread Todd Holt
Yes. I had a typo from a change that I made yesterday. Thanks for the info. Todd Holt Xidix Technologies, Inc Las Vegas, NV USA www.xidix.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Declude.Virus- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of R. Scott Perry Sent: Friday, September 19,

Re: [Declude.Virus] Declude Virus v1.76 (beta) released

2003-09-19 Thread R. Scott Perry
Love the automatic detection of forging viruses. When the feature is enabled, I assume it will automatically suppress sending of the sender.eml notification? Yes. It will automatically suppress the sender.eml and otherpostmaster.eml files, plus any .eml files that have a SKIPIFFORGING line in

RE: [Declude.Virus] WHITELIST ANYWHERE not working?

2003-09-19 Thread Andy Schmidt
Don't have the headers... However it is entirely possible, that the mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] only appeared in the SMTP RCPT TO: and was not contained anywhere in the headers oder the content. I changed it to WHITELIST TO, since this was what the test was doing effectively anyway - and is probably