On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, Marc Haber wrote:
> I think the transport_filter option (which version has that option
> been first implemented?) could be suitable for implementing a virus
> scanner. However, such a filter must have an opportunity to suppress
> message delivery at all.
It can't do that. It is running as a "filter" (in the Unix shell sense)
*during* delivery.
> Possibly the transport_filter should have some control over the
> subsequent delivery process, but that is beyond my scope.
The delivery process is not subsequent, it is concurrent.
> For the virus scanner project, does the transport_filter have a means
> to change the destination address? It would be fine to re-route
> infected messages to a special address or even /dev/null.
No. The delivery is already under way.
You really want to use a system filter to do this. Check out the
message_filter options. If the filter language isn't powerful enough,
wait for the next release of Exim (or pull the testing release) and then
you can get it to call Perl subroutines.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
