On Tuesday 01 February 2005 14:25, Renato Policani wrote: > Hi everybody.... > I am blocking video in configuration file named deny_music and in > squidGuardian in blacklist/audio-video. But some users had discovered a way > for download this extension using "?" before the extension. Exemple: > > http://www.xyz.com/video.wmv -> Squid block !! OK !! > > http://www.xyz.com/video.wmv? -> Squid don?t block.. Why ??? > before? you're sure? or do you mean the other before? ;) you are not sending your acls and you also do not say if you try it in domains or urls or expressions of squid guard, may be you try in expressions ok or try squid acl as urlpath_regex video\.wmv should catch "video.wmv" in any place of the URL !host part, means urlpath_regex \.wmv should catch any .wmv anywhere in the url but not if part of the host (example: www.wmv.com goes through) if you want to catch wmv at the end of the URL string you can try urlpath_regex \.wmv$ H please do not read further and if do not hit or flame me on this list, I just couldn't hold me back ... > Attention: ÂThis message was sent for exclusive use of the addressees above > identified, being able to contain information and or > privileged/confidential documents and law protects its secrecies. sorry for ignoring your advice, reading and replying without beeing exclusivly addressed here :)) > In case that you it has received for deceit, please, it informs the shipper > and erases it of your system. may be you claim a better grammar at babblefish ... tell me how people would know if they got your message by deceit? I would say you may have sent it by deceit but how would I know? > We notify that law forbids its retention, dissemination, distribution, copy > or use without express authorization. must be jungle law since you sent this to a public list ... even your portuguese text does not make so very much sense ... our (brazilian) constitution gives us the right to say anything since we identify ourself so you may advice that you do not agree or authorize but you're not the law, so anybody who got this can send it to where he wants to and there is no law forbidding it ... may be it turns into spam then but that then is another issue > Personal opinions of the shipper do not reflect, necessarily, the point of > view of the CETIP, which is only divulged by authorized people. pois à ... if it was the "sender's" personal note but it seems to be the company e-mail footer and so IMO you guys should produce some better shit (especially after seeing what big cetip.com.br pretends to be) -- _______________________________________________________ Infomatik http://info.matik.com.br Mensagens nÃo assinadas com GPG nÃo sÃo minhas. Messages without GPG signature are not from me. _______________________________________________________
Attachment:
pgpAezoXFJPxH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
