Watermark and User Notification

[Donnie D. Quindardo]

I'm rather certain that I've tried this; however, I'll try again. For 
which mailscanner setting should this exception occur?

Julian Field wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> It puts in 0.0.0.0 if there was no IP address present at all.
> Maybe I should change that to 127.0.0.1?
> What does anyone think of that change?
> 
> Currently, you need to change your "From" line to
> From: 0.0.0.0 no
> FromOrTo: default yes
> 
> 
> Donnie D. Quindardo wrote:
>> Message 3EDEA100004C.D62FF from 0.0.0.0 has no (or invalid) watermark 
>> or sender address
>>
>> Hmmm. :-)
>>
>> Donnie D. Quindardo wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, this is not working.
>>>
>>> /etc/MailScanner/MailScanner.conf:
>>>
>>>     Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.rules
>>>
>>> /etc/MailScanner/rules/scan.rules:
>>>
>>>     From:           127.0.0.1/32            no
>>>     FromOrTo:       default                 yes
>>>
>>> The notification message sent by "Notify Senders" if their 
>>> attachments are blocked is still being flagged as spam.
>>>
>>> Please advise,
>>>
>>> Don Q.
>>>
>>>
>>> Julian Field wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Scott Silva wrote:
>>>>> on 6-12-2008 1:26 PM Julian Field spake the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott Silva wrote:
>>>>>>> on 6-12-2008 1:10 PM Julian Field spake the following:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Donnie D. Quindardo wrote:
>>>>>>>>> - Configure MailScanner to notify users that their attachments 
>>>>>>>>> have been  blocked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Configure MailScanner to use Watermarks and note that 
>>>>>>>>> messages that have no sender and no watermark are spam.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Send an e-mail through MailScanner with an attachment that is 
>>>>>>>>> banned, perhaps "test.com".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Look in the spam quarantine of MailScanner, the notification 
>>>>>>>>> e-mail that is sent to the user is there. That's because it is 
>>>>>>>>> sent with an envelope address of <> and does not get a 
>>>>>>>>> MailScanner Signature beforehand.
>>>>>>>> In which case you just need to use a ruleset to exempt mail from 
>>>>>>>> 127.0.0.1 from watermarking checks. Should I do this 
>>>>>>>> automatically in the code, or are there situations in which this 
>>>>>>>> isn't the desired behaviour?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jules
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does a ruleset on scan messages also cover this, or is 
>>>>>>> watermarking outside that catch-all?
>>>>>> You don't need to do anything that radical, you just need a 
>>>>>> ruleset on the option that controls the checking of watermarks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jules
>>>>>>
>>>>> Let me re-phrase this... If you already have a rule in scan 
>>>>> messages for mailwatch releases, will it also cover the watermark 
>>>>> code?
>>>> If the rule is on "Scan Messages" then yes, it will cover everything.
>>>>
>>>> Jules
>>>>
> 
> Jules
> 
> - -- 
> Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
> www.MailScanner.info
> Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
> 
> Need help customising MailScanner?
> Contact me!
> Need help fixing or optimising your systems?
> Contact me!
> Need help getting you started solving new requirements from your boss?
> Contact me!
> 
> PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
> 
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGP Desktop 9.8.3 (Build 4028)
> Comment: Use Enigmail to decrypt or check this message is legitimate
> Charset: ISO-8859-1
> 
> wj8DBQFIUiiCEfZZRxQVtlQRAkmvAJ9mb0ZYqqzrotjXQdbAxjm+j2+wfQCginPu
> 0NGxjdrsTHySaDvXDtw/6Kk=
> =3bx5
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>