Re: [exim] using aux acls -- why is control not passing corr…

Kezdőlap
Üzenet törlése
Válasz az üzenetre
Szerző: snowcrash+exim-users
Dátum:  
Címzett: Heiko Schlittermann, Ted Cooper
CC: exim-users
Tárgy: Re: [exim] using aux acls -- why is control not passing correctly?
hi,

On 6/9/07, Ted Cooper <elc@???> wrote:
> As soon as you accept, no further ACLs are looked at. It looks like if
> you don't find a virus, you then hit the accept target. Try changing
> your logic to DENY or DEFER. With the deny ACL, you will not have to use
> endpass.


Yup. You're right. Works nicely (well, so far ...)

I'm fairly certain I had a 'great' reason for choosing the
accept/endpass approach here. But, for the life o' me atm, I dunno
why :-}



On 6/10/07, Heiko Schlittermann <hs@???> wrote:
> > i've Exim 'talking' to remote clamd/spamd daemons over TCP,
> >
> > av_scanner = clamd: 10.0.0.105 3310
> > spamd_address = 10.0.0.105 783
>
> Both do not resend the mail, they just evaluate, right?
> The message is not modified using av_scanner and/or spamd.


That is correct. Well, at least that's the _intention_. All header
mods are done in the calling ACL within Exim.

> May be I'm wrong, but if a (clean and nice) message comes in from let's
> say <pitti@???> it is accepted because the sender is not in the
> no_virus_scan list and the aux_acl_virus acl accepts it. I do not see
> any reason why the next acl rule should be asked.
>
> Only if the message comes from +no_virus_scan it hits the next acl.


It seems I got the operation of the endpass bass-ackwards. Swear I
read that silly passage in the book a bunch o' times ...

Thanks for the clarification!

Cheers.