Make links non-clickable and rename attachments?

Julian Field MailScanner at
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 
be 4.82.1.


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. 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?
> /peter


Julian Field MEng CITP CEng
Buy the MailScanner book at

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
Follow me at and

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

More information about the MailScanner mailing list