Best practice to handel MS rich text TNEF

[Ian Fenn]

On 8 May 2012, at 07:26, Götz Reinicke wrote:
> Currently we have tnef 1.4.5 installed from the Redhat EL reppsetory,
> but the most recent version from sourceforge is 1.4.9.
> 
> What would you suggest? Using the most recent tnef? Or switching to the
> internal check? Or disable?

I would recommend against installing 1.4.9 as this seemed to lead to a number of emails - both spam and non-spam - being marked as infected, other. (I've had no instances of this since reverting back to 1.4.5.)

At present I have MailScanner set to use 1.4.5 but I allow the deliver of large tnefs that cannot be scanned. This is a far from ideal arrangement but my clients were previously unhappy with their emails being blocked, and who can blame them?

Sadly it seems the handling of MS rich text TNEF is a real weakness with MailScanner currently.

All the best,

--
Ian