> Let's look at another possible method:
>
> - Presumptions:
>
> - you want 'noreply@<any_domain>.<any_tld> blocked
>
> - and/or others, as in:
> <specific_local_part>@<specific_domain>.<specific_tld>
>
>
> In which case, given a (production) router such as:
>
> # ROUTE_3C ALIAS: Handle legacy-style 'system' aliases in '/etc/aliases'
> file.
> #
> system_aliases:
> driver = redirect
> allow_fail
> allow_defer
> data = ${lookup{$local_part}lsearch{/etc/aliases}}
> user = <my exim daemon's UID>
> group = <my exim daemon's GID>
> file_transport = address_file
> pipe_transport = address_pipe
>
> ====
>
> Modified to (CAVEAT - UNTESTED)
>
> # ROUTE_XX Block/divert: Handle banned local_parts in '/etc/local_banned'
> file.
> #
> blocked_targets:
> driver = redirect
> allow_fail
> allow_defer
> data = ${lookup{$local_part}lsearch{/etc/local_banned}}
> user = <your exim daemon's UID>
> group = <your exim aemon's GID>
> file_transport = address_file
> pipe_transport = address_pipe
>
> =====
>
> Similar for banned domains.. or more complex version to do both at once...
>
> Optionally, you might want a verify = no
>
> Or not. Depends on what and how you do verification (elsewhere)
>
> Now the other part you perhaps need to change in the above in addition to
> which
> file is used for lookup may be the transports specified.
>
> Your chocie of writing to your own local mailstore, blackholing, diverting
> to an
> admin, bouncing back (optionally with a curt note) to the sender....
> combinations of the above...
>
> ...whatever it is you think appropriate.
>
> .. so long as it is NOT a remote smtp_delivery. Or at least not one to the
> target you want to protect from nuisances - eg a valid address for an
> off-box
> system mailadmin on your own tream might be OK.
>
> No 'system filter' needed.
>
> But this router has to come 'early' in router sequence to be effective,
> and that
> means it has to be traversed or 'looked at' for essentially all traffic.
>
> At which point one might wonder why you - and so few others - need to do
> this
> *at all*, as I haven't seen much in the way of similar needs discussed in
> the
> last .. 60 thousand or so posts to this mailing list.
>
> Short of irritating a remote to the point of blacklisting your server,
> perhaps
> with a dumbass knee-jerk autoresponder (forbidden here) the odd accidental
> response to a 'noreply' is essentially as harmless as it is
> ineffective....
>
> YMMV, YOMD,
>
> Bill Hacker
>
>
It all seems to fall apart with the first presumption. I want to block a
specific single address.
And yes it is unusual, it's a personal preference. In this case I get
several messages from the same source. All are identically formatted,
however a few of them do not include a proper from address, instead using
the noreply@???. Since most messages include the from address I will
just reply to it and go on my merry way, but if I miss the fact that I am
sending a message to noreply@ my message gets lost in the big blackhole,
no bounce, no auto response and I have no idea why this person is not
responding to my email. So I thought I would just go about bouncing it
locally to indicate I've screwed up.
