Hello R.,
Thursday, January 27, 2005, 6:21:06 PM, you wrote:
RSP How about 1.82? :)
Is 1.82 out? If so, do we need BANERAR like BANEZIPS?
--
Best regards,
Davidmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
[This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus
Hello David,
Monday, January 31, 2005, 1:17:08 PM, you wrote:
DS Hello R.,
DS Thursday, January 27, 2005, 6:21:06 PM, you wrote:
RSP How about 1.82? :)
DS Is 1.82 out? If so, do we need BANERAR like BANEZIPS?
Ok, I checked the Junkmail list and it looks like Declude is at 1.82
based on
DS Is 1.82 out? If so, do we need BANERAR like BANEZIPS?
Ok, I checked the Junkmail list and it looks like Declude is at 1.82
based on the messages but I didn't see an official notice. 1.82 is
not an option to download when I logon to Declude's site.
1.82 was released earlier this month; it
]: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Hello David,
Monday, January 31, 2005, 1:17:08 PM, you wrote:
DS Hello R.,
DS Thursday, January 27, 2005, 6:21:06 PM, you wrote:
RSP How about 1.82? :)
DS Is 1.82 out? If so, do we need BANERAR like BANEZIPS?
Ok, I checked the Junkmail list and it looks like Declude
Hello R.,
Monday, January 31, 2005, 2:56:53 PM, you wrote:
RSP For some reason, it is listed as something like SPAMHEADERS fix for
RSP v1.76+ on the website, rather than as v1.82.
Ah, ok. And 2.0 is being issued to release today?
Also, original question still holds. Do we need to make a
ON to do the same thing, but only applying to encrypted .ZIP files.
- Original Message -
From: William Stillwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: Re[3]: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Declude never has to my
Hello Scott,
Monday, January 31, 2005, 3:18:16 PM, you wrote:
SF file. For example, if you have a line BANEXT EXE and BANZIPEXTS ON, then
SF .EXE files within .ZIP files will be blocked. You can also use BANEZIPEXTS
SF ON to do the same thing, but only applying to encrypted .ZIP files.
I block
BANEZIPEXTS ON
Then I repeat my list of banned extensions using:
BANEXT BAS
BANEXT BAT
etc, etc.
By my understanding, this will ban these extensions by themselves,
ban these extensions when found within encrypted .zip files, NOT ban
these extensions from within normal .zip files and with 1.82
the BANZIPEXTS ON is for non encypted zips
the BANEZIPEXTS ON is for encrypted zips
- Original Message -
From: David Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 2:30 PM
Subject: Re[5]: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Hello Scott
My log files go to a separate directory (partition if
available) and are zipped either weekly or monthly depending
on size and when there are enough they get burned to CD then deleted.
As we're talking about partitions, spool folders and
moving/deleting/archiving files. I've noted that
Hi Markus,
Back to the topic: If someone want I can publish the script-part who
moves
the D file back to the spool folder and runs smtp32.exe with the
associated
Q-file so that it will be delivered immediatly.
If you were to send me the part or publish it somewhere I would take a
crack at
: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
1.82 will treat encrypted .RAR files the same as encrypted .ZIP
files,
and will block banned file extensions in .RAR files the same way as it
blocks banned file extensions in .ZIP files.
Beautiful!
Now we just need McAfee to scan inside RAR files
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 12:48 PM
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Andy,
Someone posted on this list a while ago a small ASP page that I am using to
requeue a banned file. I send out a bannotify.eml what has
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Hi Goran:
Oh, I've been thinking about just that. However does that mean you
hold
all
virus files?
I don't think I could afford the additional disk space (the spool file
is
already too big as it is.)
Best
] [mailto:Declude.Virus-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 5:15 PM
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Notices only go out for banned files. We include a statement that the
email
will be available to be requeued for x number
201 934-3414 x20 (Business)
Fax:+1 201 934-9206
http://www.HM-Software.com/
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darin Cox
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 05:15 PM
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Subject: Re: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why
before it settled back down to around 90% spam...and stayed there.
Darin.
- Original Message -
From: Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 5:28 PM
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
I may have to start doing that. I
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Goran Jovanovic
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 2:24 PM
To: Declude.Virus@declude.com
Subject: RE: [Declude.Virus] RAR Support - why not?
Darin,
What do you do with the old log files? Do you put them on another
machine for processing/analysis
Hm,
It isn't gonna happen, unless rarsoft sells to winzip.
I'm not sure if this it legit:
http://www.rarlab.com/rar_add.htm
But it appears that unrar source code, DLLs etc are readily available to
software developers?
(Even if it was not, Winzip already has command line links for some of the
Hm,
http://www.rarreg.com/licence.php
No person or company may distribute separate parts of the package
== with the exception of the UnRAR components ==,
without written permission of the copyright owner.
So - it looks as if it's an open license for the UnRAR components - and only
the
In fact, I wonder if Declude 2.1 could use those libraries to unrar files
to look inside RAR archives?
How about 1.82? :)
1.82 will treat encrypted .RAR files the same as encrypted .ZIP files, and
will block banned file extensions in .RAR files the same way as it blocks
banned file extensions
1.82 will treat encrypted .RAR files the same as encrypted .ZIP files,
and will block banned file extensions in .RAR files the same way as it
blocks banned file extensions in .ZIP files.
Beautiful!
Now we just need McAfee to scan inside RAR files G
(Globally banning zipped .EXE files is not
- Original Message -
From: Andy Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now we just need McAfee to scan inside RAR files G
Indeed! Even F-Prot scans inside of .rar files:
=
cat report.txt
Virus scanning report - 27 January 2005 @ 16:46
F-PROT ANTIVIRUS
Program version: 3.16a
Engine version:
23 matches
Mail list logo
