Bug

[Jerry Benton]

I’ll review the code and see where i can plug in “not checked” for the spam header when it is not scanned. Thanks for testing. 

-
Jerry Benton
www.mailborder.com



> On Feb 4, 2016, at 7:29 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
> 
> On 02/04/2016 03:09 PM, Jerry Benton wrote:
>> Can someone test this please?
> 
> 
> I tested and it seems OK. With Scan Messages = yes and a message
> containing a virus, I get
> 
> X-GPC-MailScanner-ID: A083311E1A7E.AA8CD
> X-GPC-MailScanner: Found to be infected
> X-GPC-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached,
> score=-0.85,
> 	required 5, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -0.75, DKIM_SIGNED 0.10,
> 	DKIM_VALID -0.10, DKIM_VALID_AU -0.10,
> 	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS 0.00, NO_RELAYS -0.00)
> X-GPC-MailScanner-From: mark at sbh16.songbird.com
> X-Spam-Status: No
> 
> and with Scan Messages = virus I get
> 
> X-GPC-MailScanner-ID: 8C0CA11E1A7E.AAD33
> X-GPC-MailScanner: Found to be infected
> X-GPC-MailScanner-SpamCheck:
> X-GPC-MailScanner-From: mark at sbh16.songbird.com
> X-Spam-Status: No
> 
> 
> so it appears in this case while it still adds the
> 
> X-GPC-MailScanner-SpamCheck:
> 
> and
> 
> X-Spam-Status: No
> 
> headers that it is not doing the Spam scan. I also tested with an
> attached junk.txt.exe file and with Scan Messages = yes it detects the
> bad file name and with Scan Messages = virus, it doesn't.
> 
> I'd say the fix is good.
> 
> -- 
> Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
> San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan
> 
> 
> -- 
> MailScanner mailing list
> mailscanner at lists.mailscanner.info
> http://lists.mailscanner.info/listinfo/mailscanner
>