Spam ruleset

Billy A. Pumphrey bpumphrey at WOODMACLAW.COM
Fri Feb 6 14:20:59 GMT 2004

Thanks for the additional note, I will change mine to your suggestion

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Hepworth [mailto:martinh at SOLID-STATE-LOGIC.COM] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 9:18 AM
Subject: Re: Spam ruleset

Pete wrote:
> Billy A. Pumphrey wrote:
>>  In your spam.whitelist.rules put:
>> FromOrTo:         user at <mailto:user at>
> IS the difference between the above 2 suggestions,
> 1. use whitelists
> 2. use a spoam check rule
> that 1 will even prevent virus scanning, while 2 will only disable the
> spame/filetype/content filtering?
> Thanks
> pete

Billy's rule will still use the spam checks, but will give a score of
-100 to start with - ie it will be very very unlikely to trigger the
spam catch (default of +5).

The rule that myself and Julian suggest won;t run SA at all for those
emails, thus saving CPU time..

Martin Hepworth
Snr Systems Administrator
Solid State Logic
Tel: +44 (0)1865 842300


This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept
for the presence of computer viruses and is believed to be clean.


More information about the MailScanner mailing list