From: Jonathan S. <jn...@ge...> - 2006-03-30 11:53:41
|
On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 11:31, Cole Bantam wrote: > Hello Mr. Stowe, >=20 > Thank you for your help. The changings to the script does indeed block > unwanted extensions. But the result is, that a simple "Application Erro= r" > occurs. This mesage will not make it clear to the user, that a wrong fi= le > type is responsible that for. To create a clear errorpage, I could exte= nd > the debug info. But the developers say that debug is only f=C3=BCr test= ing, not > for real life scenario. So is there a better way to do that? If it is t= o > much work to do it "quick n' dirty", is this feature planed to debut in > future versions of TFMail? >=20 Yes correct that is all that it was intended to do. The feature to use a template for the error message is on the TODO. > To be honest, I do not understand what was the developers intention on = the > current "file type limitation" system. OK, executable files are renamed= (if > not listed), which is good. For your example with the image it is well = done. > But what if the upload is for "all" files exept executables? Then you h= ave > to put hundreds of file extension to the list, just to block a couple... >=20 > Wishlist for future Versons of Tfmail: >=20 > - Possibility to configure if the File Extension list is a white or > blacklist > - Possibility to configure if wrong file types are rejected (with prope= r > errorpage) or renamed Code contributions are gratefully accepted. /J\ --=20 This e-mail is sponsored by http://www.integration-house.com/ |