Re: [exim] per user spamassassin setup

Páxina inicial
Borrar esta mensaxe
Responder a esta mensaxe
Autor: Dave Lugo
Data:  
Para: exim-users
Asunto: Re: [exim] per user spamassassin setup
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006, SeattleServer.com wrote:
> > Is there a way to have exim call spamassassin with the user to whom
> > the e-mail is sent?
>
> Not unless your defer after every recipient in the RCPT ACL so that exim sees
> a new copy of the message (and thus a new instance of the DATA ACL) for each
> recipient. I really doubt you want that.
>


I currently do just that on a handful of vanity domains. In a low-volume
situation, it works perfectly fine.

>
> Run it through SA in the data ACL regardless. Add a header to the message if
> you want and/or set an ACL variable with the result. Then decide whether to
> accept or reject or filter it per-recipient in the router or whatever exim
> hands the mail off to (maildrop, for instance). You can use the ACL variable
> in the routers.
>


(I've been thinking of that as well, as the next project on my hobby
stuff)

Another way to do it...

I've been considering accepting multiple rcpt_to, and setting up
some sort of recursive loop in the DATA acl to churn through each
rcpt's SA prefs.

. If all the recipients' configs say 'accept', it's 250'd.

. If all the recipients' configs say 'reject', it's 5xx'd.

. If some of the recipients' configs say 'reject', 5xx it,
AND give a detailed rejection message along the lines of:

(adjust as needed for multiline responses)

550  One or more recipient addresses were unable to accept
     this message.
     REJECTED: user@???, joe@???
     ACCEPTED: frank@???



My possibly flawed thinking runs along the lines of:

  . real mailing lists use VERP, and don't do multiple rcpt_to
  . stuff to multiple rcpts like this usually person-to-person,
    and they might notice the rejection



Has anyone tried something like this?

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Dave Lugo   dlugo@???    LC Unit #260   TINLC
Have you hugged your firewall today?   No spam, thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------
Are you the police?  . . . .  No ma'am, we're sysadmins.