Unexpected Error?

[Mark Nienberg]

I'm seeing this too, with Sophos 3.72.  I have some PDF files that 3.71 scans
successfully, but 3.72 chokes on with the "unexpected error".  I sent a sample file to
Sophos.

My MailScanner is still using 3.71, so I think I'll postpone the update to 3.72 on this
machine.

Mark Nienberg

On 4 Aug 2003 at 12:02, Max Kipness wrote:

> I've got an employee who has been sending docs all morning and then
> suddenly has a problem with one doc getting corrupt/unexpected errors.
> Does this just mean that MailScanner thinks it's corrupt and then had an
> error trying to check it? Here is the log:
>
> Aug  4 11:47:53 xxxxxxxxx sendmail[29123]: h74GklL1029123:
> from=<gcudmore at geniant.com>, size=1015025, class=0, nrcpts=1,
> msgid=<036A6BCC9FD10749AD3CE32255AF49A601702857 at dalsxc01.geniant.net>,
> proto=ESMTP, daemon=MTA, relay=adsl-64-217-212-137.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net
> [64.217.212.137]
> Aug  4 11:47:53 xxxxxxxxx sendmail[29123]: h74GklL1029123:
> to=<Vin.Sundaram at companyx.com>, delay=00:01:05, mailer=esmtp, pri=30639,
> stat=queued
> Aug  4 11:47:56 xxxxxxxxx MailScanner[20684]: Could not check
> ./h74GklL1029123/winmail.dat/Xxxxxxxxx AD Design - DRAFT.zip/Xxxxxxxxx
> AD Design - DRAFT.doc (corrupt)
> Aug  4 11:47:56 xxxxxxxxx MailScanner[20684]: Could not check
> ./h74GklL1029123/winmail.dat/Xxxxxxxxx AD Design - DRAFT.zip/Xxxxxxxxx
> AD Design - DRAFT.doc (unexpected error [0x80040202])
> Aug  4 11:47:56 xxxxxxxxx MailScanner[20684]: Could not check
> ./h74GklL1029123/winmail.dat/Xxxxxxxxx AD Design - DRAFT.zip/Xxxxxxxxx
> AD Design - DRAFT.doc (unexpected error [0x80040202])
> Aug  4 11:47:57 xxxxxxxxx MailScanner[20684]: Saved infected
> "winmail.dat" to
> /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/20030804/h74GklL1029123
> Aug  4 11:48:05 xxxxxxxxx sendmail[29165]: h74GklL1029123:
> to=<userx at companyx.com>, delay=00:01:17, xdelay=00:00:08, mailer=esmtp,
> pri=120639, relay=houmail.companyx.com. [204.194.96.13], dsn=2.0.0,
> stat=Sent (h74GlvRp028965 Message accepted for delivery)
>
> Thanks,
> Max