Peter Bowyer wrote:
> This will only help the OP if he moves away from his current
> router/transport/spamc mechanism and starts to use the built-in
> content scanning facilities.
Oh, sorry, that's true.
Well, then I recommend switching to the built-in scanning facilities first.
If that is out of question, it's still possible to check the message
size and to except the larger messages from being scanned.
In either case, it's not a solution I'm fond of because checking the
message size alone is no guarantee that the ressources needed for
scanning will remain within acceptable limits. I consider that as a
security hole --- a very large one, actually --- unless appropriate
precautions are implemented into the software doing the scans, like
spamassassin/spamd.
But I didn't find any better workaround. Scanning for viruses cannot be
omitted; and not filtering for SPAM isn't an ideal solution, either.
