Make links non-clickable and rename attachments?
MailScanner at ecs.soton.ac.uk
Tue Nov 9 14:19:01 GMT 2010
I cannot easily help with item 1 on your list, but I have implemented
item 2 for you.
There is a new type of rule in the filename.rules.conf and
filetype.rules.conf files, where you can set the action to be "rename".
To go with this, there is a new MailScanner.conf setting called "Rename
Pattern" where you say how you want the detected attachments renamed.
Here is the doc for the "Rename Pattern" setting:
# In the "Filename Rules" and "Filetype Rules" rule files, you can
# say that you want particular attachment names or types to be "disarmed"
# by being renamed. See the sample files for examples of this.
# The "rename" rules simply change the filename of the attachment
# according to the pattern in this setting, so that the user cannot
# simply double-click on the attachment, but must save it then rename it
# back to its original name; only then can they double-click on the file.
# This provides a simple safeguard so that users have to consciously
# think about what they are doing.
# The file will be renamed according to this setting, where the string
# "__FILENAME__" will be replaced with the attachment's original name.
# This can also be the filename of a ruleset.
Rename Pattern = __FILENAME__.disarmed
Hopefully will do what you want!
I will release a new beta in a minute, including this feature. It should
On 04/11/2010 14:29, Peter Bonivart wrote:
> We have lots of problems with users clicking on everything. If it's
> remotely interesting to them they click even on links or attachments
> that are executable. I know they should be educated but that's almost
> impossible it seems. Now I have gotten two requests:
> 1. Can we make links non-clickable? Outlook finds links even in plain
> text, it would mean more work to have to copy and paste into a web
> browser. I'm thinking one implementation would be to replace every dot
> with space-dot-space or similar.
> 2. Can we rename attachments? If attachments weren't executable but
> had to be saved to another name (from e.g. foo.exe.bar) it would also
> mean more work for the user. I'm thinking one implementation would be
> to have files denied by filename/filetype rules be renamed with a
> suffix added. As an option of course.
> The extra work needed may give these users (mostly PHB types) the time
> they need to remember it's not a good thing to click on everything
> they didn't ask for in the first place.
> Any ideas how to proceed? Anyone already have something similar implemented?
Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Need help customising MailScanner?
Need help fixing or optimising your systems?
Need help getting you started solving new requirements from your boss?
PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654
Follow me at twitter.com/JulesFM and twitter.com/MailScanner
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the MailScanner