4.25-6 Bug?

[Jeff A. Earickson]

Julian,

   I've applied this patch; it will take awhile before I notice any
results.

   This bug was a beautiful thing, however.  Last night we had some
clown plug a laptop into a public port, and this machine had a spam
trojan on it.  Since the MS bug caused the "From: 137.146. yes"
rule to be ignored in the whitelist, all of the spewage got marked
as high spam by MailScanner -- and deleted.  Not a peep to the outside
world.  I'm seriously thinking of removing my outbound domain-based
rule from my whitelist.

  Does any other site NOT exempt their locally originating email from
spam checks?  What is the thinking on this topic?

--- Jeff Earickson
    Colby College

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Julian Field wrote:

> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:35:18 +0000
> From: Julian Field <mailscanner at ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
> Reply-To: MailScanner mailing list <MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
> To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: Re: 4.25-6 Bug?
>
> Apply this to Config.pm
>
> --- Config.pm.old       2003-11-13 12:34:47.000000000 +0000
> +++ Config.pm   2003-11-13 12:34:10.000000000 +0000
> @@ -1771,6 +1771,7 @@
>                                   $rulesfilename, $!);
>     flock($rulesfh, $LOCK_SH);
>
> +  $RuleScalars{$keyword} = []; # Set up empty ruleset
>     $linecounter = 0;
>     $errors      = 0;
>     while(<$rulesfh>) {
>
> At 12:00 13/11/2003, you wrote:
> >I am seeing this bug too.  Setup: Solaris 9, 4.25-6, Net::CIDR installed,
> >perl 5.8.2.
> >
> >--- Jeff Earickson
> >
> >On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Steve Freegard wrote:
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:12:30 -0000
> > > From: Steve Freegard <steve.freegard at LBSLTD.CO.UK>
> > > Reply-To: MailScanner mailing list <MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK>
> > > To: MAILSCANNER at JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > > Subject: 4.25-6 Bug?
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I've just upgraded my busiest MailScanner box from 4.22-4 to 4.25-6 as I've
> > > had problems with MailScanner occasionally taking up 95% CPU (and strace of
> > > this process just shows "wait4(-1,"), I wanted to try the new Quarantine
> > > permissions features with MailWatch, and it was about time I upgraded :-))
> > >
> > > Just a small problem though, I put the IP Addresses of my local subnet in
> > > 'spam.whitelist.rules' like:
> > >
> > > From:           172.16.                                 yes
> > > From:           192.168.1.                              yes
> > >
> > >
> > > to stop SpamAssassinating any internal mail - except this doesn't seem to
> > > work anymore (I'm guessing it has something to do with the Net::CIDR
> > > changes).
> > >
> > > I tried:
> > >
> > > From:        172.16.0.0/16                    yes
> > >
> > > But that didn't work either :-(((
> > >
> > > Is this a bug or am I doing something silly??
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > > Steve.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> > > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> > > are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> > > the sender and delete the message from your mailbox.
> > >
> > > This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> > > MailScanner (www.mailscanner.info) for the presence of computer viruses.
> > >
> > >
>
> --
> Julian Field
> www.MailScanner.info
> MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
>
> PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC  7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
>