Max SpamAssassin Size problems

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at
Thu Aug 24 10:17:03 IST 2006

On 24/08/06, Julian Field <MailScanner at> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Anthony Peacock wrote:
(snip Anthonys excellent summary of the problem)
> Yes, you are absolutely correct. Non-spam may well include huge images.
> The problem with rewinding to the previous boundary is that you may end
> up not giving SpamAssassin _anything_ to work with.
> So it's up for a vote:
> do I chop half way through an image?
> do I chop at the end of an image?
> do I carry on for a max of 100 lines of Base64 data or until the end of
> an image, which is earlier?
> I have no intention of making the 100 configurable, it will be
> impossible for 99.9% of users to know what to set it to.
Isn't there a middle here too? A configuration option for the admins
who want/don't want the new behaviour, would perhaps be something to
consider? So that you could "be safe, but break SA scanning to some
extent" or "be somewhat unsafe and still break SA scanning to some
extent"...:-). Note that that wouldn't be the same as a configurable
"100 or end of image" config limit.
As to the vote, I'd vote for the "100 or end of image" alternative.
Any which way we go here, we can't get a perfect solution, so a
reasonable compromise is all we can aim at.

-- Glenn
email: glenn < dot > steen < at > gmail < dot > com
work: glenn < dot > steen < at > ap1 < dot > se

More information about the MailScanner mailing list