Different Subject for Object Codebase/IFrame

Nathan Johanson nathan at TCPNETWORKS.NET
Tue Mar 25 17:53:09 GMT 2003


Actually, I don't want to allow the message.
I'm looking to deny them (or rather remove the attachment or message
body), but simply tag them differently than viruses (with a modifier
like (INSECURE). In other words, the messages would be denied, all
dangerous stuff would be removed, the same notices will be sent to all
parties (most importantly the recipient and the postmaster)--the only
difference would be the subject tag.

If I subsequently allow them via whitelist entries, I wouldn't want the
subject modified at all.

Does that make sense?

Nathan

-----Original Message-----
From: Julian Field [mailto:mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 9:38 AM
To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: Different Subject for Object Codebase/IFrame


But at the moment the attachment (or even the whole message body) is
removed. So what you actually want is the option to allow and tag
Codebase/IFrames, and to have a different tag for them.
This will take rather more work, as the "allow and tag" code isn't
there.
If you don't hear anything from me in the next few weeks, prod me again.

At 17:32 25/03/2003, you wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Someone requested this feature earlier, but I never caught the response
>to it.
>
>Is it possible to append a different subject modifier for Object
>Codebase and Iframe tags. I don't necessarily need a special modifier
>for each, but one for both would suffice.
>
>At this point, the subject is appended with (Virus?} for these two
>issues, which can be misleading for some of our end users. These are
not
>really viruses. A different subject modifier will help make it clearer
>to our users what is actually happening. If they receive messages with
>that they want to read (such as CNN news updates), they can request the
>message to be whitelisted and improve their experience. Many of our
>users get scared by the (VIRUS) annotation, and usually avoid the
>message altogether. If there is a different subject modifier (such as
>INSECURE), they can easily identify the problem and submit the message
>for whitelisting. Furthermore, a different modifier for these kinds of
>objections could further refine any statistics we collect on viruses
>down the road.
>
>For instance, I'm thinking of the following;
>
>Message contains a "real" virus (klez, sobig, etc.), append {VIRUS?} to
>the subject line.
>Message contains dangerous Iframe or Objecte Codebase, append
(INSECURE)
>--or some other annotation-- to the subject line.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Nathan Johanson
>Email: nathan at tcpnetworks.net

--
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support




More information about the MailScanner mailing list