On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Greg Ward wrote:
> On 06 September 2002, Philip Hazel said:
> > The RCPT ACL doesn't reject messages; it rejects addresses. If all
> > addresses are rejected, the server doesn't even get to see the contents
> > of the message.
>
> Right. I think I have figured out a nicer way to do this; it involves
> turning "deny" ACL statements into "warn", and then later checking for
> the header added by the warning.
>
> For example, the first statement in my RCPT ACL is this:
>
> # If the sender address or domain is listed in spammer-*.cdb,
> # reject all recipients.
> deny senders = @@cdb;/etc/exim/spammer-domains.cdb : \
> cdb;/etc/exim/spammer-addrs.cdb
> message = message from known spammer rejected
>
> In my alternative RCPT ACL -- to be used when I want to save all
> rejected mail -- I use this instead:
>
> warn senders = @@cdb;/etc/exim/spammer-domains.cdb : \
> cdb;/etc/exim/spammer-addrs.cdb
> message = X-reject: known-spammer; \
> message from known spammer rejected
>
> Then, my local_scan() function will look for an X-reject header. If
Or you can even do this in a DATA ACL, checking for the same conditions.
DATA rejections log the headers (only) in rejectlog..
> there, it will 1) save the message to .../known-spammer (folder name
> taken from the header), and 2) return LOCAL_SCAN_REJECT with the message
> "message from known spammer rejected" (also from the header).
>
> I still have to do a fair amount of cut-n-paste coding, but at least now
> it's all still in the Exim config file. Some ACL statements are trivial
> to recode in Python -- eg. checking for 8-bit junk in the subject
> header. But I have no desire to rewrite header syntax verification; I'm
> sure it could be done, but exactly emulating Exim's behaviour is waaaay
> more trouble than it's worth.
>
> > The DATA ACL does have the message available while it is running. I
> > guess you could use the ${run expansion item to sneak a copy of the -D
> > file (which does exist at that point). The headers are only in main
> > memory - but you can see them using $message_headers. Essentially this
> > is the same trick as using local_scan().
>
> Ooh, what an evil idea. I think looking for X-reject in local_scan() is
> probably cleaner. Will keep this trick up my sleeve if I need it
> though!
>
> Greg
> --
> Greg Ward <gward@???> http://www.gerg.ca/
> Well, I didn't expect a sort of Spanish Inquisition!
>
> --
>
> ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
>
>
