Re: [Exim] local_scan(), content-scanning, multiple recipien…

Ollie Cook wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I'm delevoping a content scanner (spam and antivirus), where each individual
>recipient at our site may have different settings for
>accepting/rejecting/marking mails that match, using Exim's local_scan()
>function but am having trouble decided how to treat messages with multiple
>recipients.
>
>For example, if recipient A has spam rejection enabled and recipient B does not
>I will need to accept the message and deliver it to B only (by manipulating the
>recipients vector), but also generate a bounce message for the sender,
>announcing that recipient A did not receive the message. (The bounce will
>probably go nowhere, but we have to have tried, in case the 'spam' was in fact
>legitimate.)
>
>Since I would not be able to give a 5xx permanent fail (which would suggest
>both recipients failed), I would have to accept the mail with 2xx and then
>subsequently generate a bounce message.
>
>I'd rather be able to reject messages based on content at SMTP time, so it's
>the remote site's responsibility to handle bounces (given that the majority of
>spam bounces will just sit on my queue for a while), but I suspect that's not
>possible.
>
>I was really just wondering (after all that), if this is what other people do
>in this situation, or if other schemes have been devised?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Ollie
>
>--
>
I developed a local_scan 'c' function which lets individuals "desire"
the junk spam.
So the policy is every one gets filtered email unless they specifically
ask for junk.
When I instigated this policy a year ago, about 10 customers out of 700
freaked
and complained. The other 690 seemed to like it.

The philosophy I used is that junk mail with MULTIPLE recipients doesn't
even qualify
to be passed on to any of my users. If it is a single receipient piece
of junk then my routine
would verify if the user has opted-in to receive it.

My routine attempts to split the junk into two categories, traditional
junk, and raw/coarse/
explicit/xxx junk. Boy is THAT a hot topic. A lot of users complained
that BIG BROTHER
was taking over. There was even a "letter to the editor" in the local
rag about that one....
But once again the majority said bravo!.