Would it be possible to have one line in the MID-logfile for each banned
filename
For example if I have
BANNAME price.com
BANNAME price.scr
BANNAME price.exe
BANNAME price.cpl
BANNAME joke.com
BANNAME joke.scr
BANNAME joke.exe
BANNAME joke.cpl
in my virus.cfg file it would be nice to have
Hi,
I must be missing something. I thought I had
blocked exe's in zip's but some new virusses came through using the exe in zip
trick. here is my virus.cfg, what am I missing?
## Declude Virus configuration file##
This file was distributed with v2.0#
CODE
#
# BANZIPEXT will block files based on EXT within ZIP files. EXT as
declared with BANEXT
# BANEZIPEXT will do the same for ecrypted ZIPs.
#
# BB 1-11-05
# Added BANxZIPEXT directives, BANEZIPEXT not neccesary as we block ALL
EZIP files.
BANZIPEXT on
#BANEZIPEXT on
Try BANZIPEXTS ON
We have enough customers using those that we can't block them.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: John T (Lists) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 4:51 AM
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] Blocking PIF Files
To add to Darin's list, I also
What version of IMail are you Declude 3.x users running? All the changes
with IMail and Declude lately have made it difficult to determine what
works with what. We are still running IMail 8.15 with Declude 1.82 because
that's the last truly reliable configuration that I know of.
Dermot
P4 2 Ghz
1 GB memory
2 ATA 133 drives mirrored
3 SCSI 10K drives configured with 3 mirrored partitions
Windows 2000 Server fully patched
Imail 8.20 HF2
Declude 3.0.5.20
Declude JM Pro
Declude Virus Pro
Declude Hijack
F-Prot 32 bit
AVG
Kiwi Syslog
Volume of aprox 5K messages per day
Sniffer
You are not alone. We have sat on the same versions watching so many
wrangle with upgrades to both over a lot of wasted time while our
systems buzz right along in very reliable fashion. We reboot our setup
about once every two months for no real reason because it appears
these will
Totally agree with you there, Sandy. We're trying to decide whether to
renew the service agreement. We paid for a year and haven't upgraded at all
due to the stability problems and bugs with 2.x and 3.x, though we are
considering upgrading to IMail 2006 and 3.0 soon. Things seem to have
settled
What are you running? 2.06 with IMail 8.15?
We're still running IMail 8.05 and 1.82 currently.
Those are the exact combos we're running, a couple of each with JM+Virus. And
I believe there's one Imail 7.15/Declude 1.82 machine running just Virus.
--Sandy
--
Imail 8.15 and Declude 1.82 here
We will wait for smartermail 3 the compare it with Imail2006 and then set up
a complete new box with Declude v3.
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005
Windows 2003, 1 GB RAM, 3.2 GHz, P4
3 drives -
C - o/s, Imail
D - spool
E - users, lists etc
used only of mail, no other applications
Imail 8.21, 9,500 +- accounts
Just renewed SA to beat the price
Declude 3.0.5.20
Virus Pro - F-prot, ClamAV
Junkmail Pro - About 35 tests/filters total,
BANNAME mailtext.zip
The ones I saw were bounces, but they may be made to look like bounces.
Only Norman and Avast found it on VirusTotal as a Sober variant, and NOD32
suspects it is a variant.
John T
eServices For You
---
This E-mail came from the Declude.Virus mailing list. To
I run 3.0.5.20 DFx - I think 1 or 2. It has a few extra fixes for me the
dnsbl issue is the ket one. I run it on two servers (imail) volume on
server 1 - 150K and volume on server 2 - 100K.
External tests: invURIBL Sniffer
Darrell
I understand what everyone is saying, beleive me I do. What I can tell you
is that 3.x is much better than 2.x. Especially, since it fixes the issues
I had where 100's of declude processes would unexpectantly launch and would
hose the server. I have found the later versions to be very stable
14 matches
Mail list logo
