How do others do it?

[Denis Beauchemin]

Chandler, Jay a écrit :
> Scott Silva wrote:
>   
>> Chandler, Jay spake the following on 12/5/2006 10:05 AM:
>>     
>>> I'm three months into the mail management duties, and I've taken the
>>> university from a kludged together implementation of SpamAssassin to
>>> running on MailScanner for inbound.
>>>
>>> Now I'm preparing to tackle the task of setting up Mailscanner
>>> outbound. 
>>>
>>> Obviously I want virus scanning enabled, but how do most of you
>>> handle the spam scanning issue?  Do you tag and pass, do you not
>>> scan at all, or some other option? 
>>>
>>>       
>> If students will be accessing the mail system, then I would hold them
>> to the same standards that you apply to incoming mail. Students are
>> notorious for doing things "they aren't supposed to do". You can
>> whitelist any administration people that need to be.   
>>     
>
> Unfortunately, we're in a position where there are close to 2000 staff
> members who'll be using it-- two boxes handle the entire outbound load
> for everything, be it our webmail, exchange server traffic, and (since
> we disabled port 25 outbound a couple months back) any SMTP traffic
> whatsoever that leaves our network.
>
> I do realize that if I start flagging departmental messages as spam,
> I'll catch hell, so how have others balanced the greater good of society
> with the needs of their local institutions?
>
>
>   
Our internal smtp servers bounce (yes, bounce!) spam messages back to 
the sender.  I don't want any obvious spam originating from my network.  
My internal rules are quite light compared to the ones on my MX 
servers.  I've been running this way for over a year and we don't have 
that many angry staff/students.  We have about 2000 staff members and 
10000 students but the students don't use the system as much as the staff.

The bounce message explains that we block spam because we want to 
preserve the good reputation of our University.

Denis

-- 
   _
  °v°   Denis Beauchemin, analyste
 /(_)\  Université de Sherbrooke, S.T.I.
  ^ ^   T: 819.821.8000x62252 F: 819.821.8045


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3595 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20061205/8678d58e/smime.bin