Outlook Rich Text Format messages - how to let through?

[Alex Neuman van der Hans]

Would love the idea. IANAP but I can help with translation, testing, etc.

Rick Cooper wrote:
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info
>> [mailto:mailscanner-bounces at lists.mailscanner.info]On Behalf Of Stephen
>> Swaney
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 12:21 PM
>> To: 'MailScanner discussion'
>> Subject: RE: Outlook Rich Text Format messages - how to let through?
>>
>>
>>
>>     
> [..]
>   
>> http://ytnef.sourceforge.net/
>>
>> I quote from the Sourceforge page:
>>
>> "ytnef is a program to decode TNEF streams (winmail.dat). Unlike other
>> similar programs, it can also decode meeting requests and create VCal
>> entries for easy import. It can also create vCard entries from
>> contact cards
>> and vTodo entries from task entries. It also has a Perl script that can be
>> used in procmail recipes to automatically reformat incoming mail
>> appropriately."
>>
>> It might be possible rework this code to plug into MailScanner as
>> a "Generic
>> Virus Scanner".
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>     
>
> I looked at this and I don't think it would work as a generic virus scanner
> (would be called at the wrong time), but it doesn't look like it would be
> too difficult to incorporate into MailScanner. However, the ytnefprocess.pl
> has a couple of short commings I can see:
> 	1. It uses a lot of backticks, they could be replaced by internal perl in
> most cases, except the external call to
> 	   /usr/bin/ytnef. That could be handled by SafePipe easily.
> 	2. It takes it's input from STDIN and outputs to STDOUT. That could be
> changed to file I/O easy enough
>
> Since it would have to be called before the tnef handling it would have to
> be called at the top of the explode function so the new attachments could be
> extracted and scanned (I assume, Julian?). I would think this would be
> better made a function and perhaps it could be used like the unrar where a
> check for /usr/bin/ytnef is made and it's used if there and the calling
> block is ignored if it's not there. The tests I did seemed to be fast and
> created regular attachments from the tnef junk so I am thinking of patching
> it in for my own installs but I am wondering what Julian thinks as far as
> main-streaming it?
>
> I attached a copy of the perl script I used in testing
>
> Rick
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
>   

-- 

Alex Neuman van der Hans
N&K Technology Consultants
Tel. +507 214-9002 - http://nkpanama.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20060208/8d044718/attachment.html