Spam Bounce action issues

[Jan-Peter Koopmann]

On Friday, June 04, 2004 4:34 PM Max Kipness wrote:

> I for one understand the implications. The problem is I
> CANNOT allow critical messages to possibly disappear in a
> black hole. I'm not sure if there is a 100% accurate way of
> assuring no false-positives, but I'm not there yet. I guess
> maybe it depends on what type of business you are handling. I
> have a financial brokerage firm that won't tolerate it.

Then bouncing is not a solition for you either. Many of those
newsletters etc. tend to have an invalid "Mail From" as well. Or the
bounce is never read etc. The only way you can surely achieve what you
want is to flag spam and deliver everything. The user could then filter
spam in local folders (even seperated by low/high spam) browse through
it and delete spam en block. There simply is no other way to be
absolutely sure! Even though I handle it differently I completely see
your point here. BUT: Your point is valid, choosing bounce to solve the
problem is not since it does not solve your problem!

> Thanks to some suggestions by Alan, I think. I'm now using

I think it was mine but hey... Alan and most people here are using the
same setup so I would call it "common sense". :-)

> (hoping) there will be no false positives above that.

There should not be any.

Regards,
  JP

-------------------------- MailScanner list ----------------------
To leave, send    leave mailscanner    to jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk
Before posting, please see the Most Asked Questions at
http://www.mailscanner.biz/maq/     and the archives at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html