Where to file the "file" bug

Andreas Kasenides Andreas.Kasenides at cs.ucy.ac.cy
Mon Nov 19 09:30:13 GMT 2007

Thanks Glenn for your reply.
Can you please elaborate on how I can save only the body part of a 
messafe so I can experiment with
different "file" versions and configurations? I have many "messages" 
that cause this issue but could not
get "file" to spit what I want. Or maybe explain how MailScanner does 
this internally, so I can
duplicate its functionality.
Now I am determined to follow through with this and provide at least a guide
on which "file" versions or configs cause MailScanner to misbehave?

Glenn Steen wrote:
> On 16/11/2007, Andreas Kasenides <Andreas.Kasenides at cs.ucy.ac.cy> wrote:
>> Is there a place where I can report a bug?
>> I have the same problem, reported ages ago, with the "file" command
>> where MailScanner
>> believes that a message is an MS-DOG executable (.exe, .com) while it is
>> apparently only
>> a .txt attachment or a forward which is sent as "inline" text.
>> Apparently this happens very often
>> with MS-Outlook mailers and with messages that contain characters other
>> than the standard
>> West European sets. Yes I have read a lot about this on this list.
>> The problem has been placed on the shoulders of the "file" command
>> erroneously reporting an
>> executable file when it is not.
>> Apparently this is not always true. In my case I have several messages
>> which the file command
>> reports as "RFC 822 mail text" yet MailScanner will not pass through.
>> I am using CentOS 5 and MailScanner 4.63.8.
>> Any help? since the only other alternative(??) is to completely disable
>> the FileType detection?
> If you save only the body part and do a file on that (I imagine you
> might have a few in your quarantine, if you have things set up to
> quarantine infections), file WILL tell you another story.
> That it say the above on the "message" file is quite correct, but it
> wasn't that that it logged/reacted on;-).
> As to the proper place to report bugs in the file command, chack your
> package management system.... One can usually find relevant
> information there.
> But remember that if your distro/OS isn't extremely new, with very
> aggressive package selections, the file command you use is not the
> latest from the developer... So then the proper place to file a bug
> might be with the creator of said distro/OS.
> Since that route might lead to nothing in the short term, most people
> affected by this either "update" file to a newer version (perhaps even
> from source), or just edit/compile the magic file(s).
>> Thanks
>> Andreas
> Cheers

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20071119/431129f6/attachment.html

More information about the MailScanner mailing list