Renaud, sorry for the PM...
Renaud Allard schrieb:
> Are you sure they are authenticated against exim, not just on your
> webmail? Could you show us logs of the authentication?
Header:
Return-path: <xxx@xxx>
Envelope-to: yyy@yyy
Delivery-date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:01:23 +0200
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
by xxx with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <xxx@xxx>)
id 1K35un-0004EC-50
for yyy@yyy; Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:01:23 +0200
Received: from xxx ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (xxx [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id EEF3Og1ocNQL for <yyy@yyy>;
Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:01:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from zzz
by xxx with esmtpa (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <xxx@xxx>)
id 1K35un-0004E7-0i
for yyy@yyy; Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:01:17 +0200
Message-ID: <4843B6DB.3050900@xxx>
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:01:15 +0200
From: Markus Kadelke <markus@???>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.8.1.14)
Gecko/20080421 Thunderbird/2.0.0.14 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: markus@???
Subject: Should not be checked
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Log:
Jun 2 11:01:22 lxmk spamd[14164]: spamd: connection from localhost
[127.0.0.1] at port 59808
Jun 2 11:01:22 lxmk spamd[14164]: spamd: checking message
<01c8c4b0$c0eb6680$4257acd5@telltech> for spamd:1001
Jun 2 11:01:23 lxmk spamd[14492]: spamd: clean message (-4.4/7.0) for
spamd:1001 in 5.9 seconds, 1248 bytes.
Jun 2 11:01:23 lxmk spamd[14492]: spamd: result: . -4 -
ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00
scantime=5.9,size=1248,user=spamd,uid=1001,required_score=7.0,rhost=localhost,raddr=127.0.0.1,rport=59803,mid=<4843B6DB.3050900@xxx>,bayes=0.003047,autolearn=disabled
Jun 2 11:01:23 lxmk amavis[711]: (00711-05) Passed CLEAN,
[212.227.66.3] <xxx@xxx> -> <yyy@yyy>, Message-ID:
<4843B6DB.3050900@???>, mail_id: EEF3Og1ocNQL, Hits: -, size:
723, queued_as: 250 OK id=1K35un-0004EC-50, 6556 ms
OK, it seems that it is sent to spamd by amavisd, so I can close that
question :-)
> I fail to see why you are still using amavisd. If you use amavisd, you
> have to accept mails to deliver them to amavis, so mails will not be
> rejected but bounced to the probably faked sender, thus creating
> collateral spam.
I use amavis because it is able to check archives, documents and so on.
