Jump to content

Surfergirl

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Surfergirl

  • Rank
    Newbie
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Brazil
  • Interests
    Surf of course!
  1. Our corporate hosts are heterogeneous and we are not used to upgrade imediately to new versions. We first waited ESET v.6 Portuguese to be released and waited for it´s first Engine Update, when several bugs where corrected. At the end of last year, our Brazilian supplier flagged Ok and we started our migration schedule. We are now applying compatibility tests with some group of users and expect to conclude migration this year.
  2. I mean, after upgrading to CU13 the problem was solved. We don´t have Outlook messages changed to Draft anymore. We did not have to upgrade ESET. We are still using ESET v.5.
  3. Hello All, hi RvW, We are using Exchange Cached Mode in Outlook clients. The problem seems to be from Microsoft, not ESET. We´d like to make clear that we´ve updated our Exchange 2013 CU3 to CU11 and the Drafts Messages disappeared from Shared Mailboxes. And we are still using Eset 5.
  4. We are tracking this problem for more than 6 months. Our environment is Exchange Server 2013 CU3, client Outlook 2010 -32Bits- Pt-BR (Office 2010 with KB2910899 update applied), ESET Endpoint Protection v.5.0.2237 and Windows 7 Pro - 64Bits - PT-Br. Accounts are Microsoft Exchange by default and shared accounts are automapped. These tests were performed with ESET´s Outlook Integration enabled. The problem shows up in shared accounts or regular accounts with delegated Full Control Access (the same concept as shared accounts). We are certain that: 1) If every client Outlook has cached mode disabled, 100% messages arriving in the shared account´s Inbox will be changed to DRAFT; 2) There´s a side effect of ESET antispam Engine in Integration mode: Spam messages to shared accounts, moved by ESET antispam or Outlook filters to Junk Mail folder are replicated to Conflicts folder of every user in the shared account group. So users of shared accounts, that receives a lot of Spam, have also problems with their individual quota. 3) If we turn off Eset´s Outlook Integratin there will be no more Draft or replicated Conflict messages. This is a sample of a Sincronyzation Error generated by a "Test 1" message replicated to Conflicts, note the action of ESET Scanner,Antispam and MessageFlag over the message. Modification Resolution 13:55:04 Message class: {SU:IPM.Note} 13:55:04 Mail Conflict Resolution 13:55:04 Local subject: {SU:Test 1} 13:55:04 Remote subject: {SU:Test 1} 13:55:04 Local Message Entry ID: {CB:70, LPB:0x0000000079D40DC4BC3B0B4182AB0107FFDC47BE0700C62503EBA7B44047BDE0658206614692000000263D1B0000043A2B9AE31B074C998286A62DC949A10000B9372AB70000} 13:55:04 Remote Message Entry ID: {CB:70, LPB:0x00000000120B0CAEFBC41D459249FAB583569E330700C62503EBA7B44047BDE0658206614692000000263D1B0000043A2B9AE31B074C998286A62DC949A10000B9372AB70000} 13:55:04 Local Message ChgKey: {CB:20, LPB:0x69904AA2787815419869D58B3CD3D44F00002E4C} 13:55:04 Remote Message ChgKey: {CB:22, LPB:0x043A2B9AE31B074C998286A62DC949A10000B93819C2} 13:55:04 Local Message PCL: {CB:44, LPB:0x16043A2B9AE31B074C998286A62DC949A10000B93819C01469904AA2787815419869D58B3CD3D44F00002E4C} 13:55:04 Remote Message PCL: {CB:23, LPB:0x16043A2B9AE31B074C998286A62DC949A10000B93819C2} 13:55:04 Checking local modifications 13:55:04 Compare property: 0x007D001F 13:55:04 Ignore property: 0x3FFA001F 13:55:04 Compare named property: Emon Scanner Build 13:55:04 Compare named property: EsetAntispamMsgHeader 13:55:04 Compare named property: EsetMessageFlag 13:55:04 Getting remote properties 13:55:04 Checking remote modifications 13:55:04 Compare (conflict) property: 0x007D001F 13:55:04 Local: {SU:Received: from SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) by SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.775.38 via Mailbox Transport; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:32 -0200 Received: from SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) by SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.775.38; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:31 -0200 Received: from SERVER.xxx.br ([::1]) by SERVER.xxx.br ([::1]) with mapi id 15.00.0775.031; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:31 -0200 13:55:04 Remote: {SU:Received: from SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) by SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.775.38 via Mailbox Transport; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:32 -0200 Received: from SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) by SERVER.xxx.br (10.11.39.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.775.38; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:31 -0200 Received: from SERVER.xxx.br ([::1]) by SERVER.xxx.br ([::1]) with mapi id 15.00.0775.031; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 13:54:31 -0200 13:55:04 Not equal (conflict) property: 0x007D001F 13:55:04 Local modification: {15:54:43.0557 10/02/2015 [DD/MM/YYYY]} 13:55:04 Remote modification: {15:54:55.0776 10/02/2015 [DD/MM/YYYY]} 13:55:04 Conflict generated, remote item is winner Our question is: do ESET assure that ESET's Outlook integration is compatible to MS Exchange automapped shared accounts? We asked regional dealer and they assured compatibility for IMAP and POP3 accounts. No answer about the situation above. What will be the impact over the network if ESET Integration is disabled?
×
×
  • Create New...