Custom function white/black list bug?

[Julian Field]

Richard Lynch wrote:
> Julian Field wrote:
>
> {...snip...}
>
>>> I guess.  I've been using "default" for our_domain.  That way it 
>>> applies to our_domain and some of the other domains we handle.  I 
>>> did try putting abuse at our_domain in the 
>>> spam.bydomain/whitelist/our_domain file and it still didn't get 
>>> white listed.  It only started working when I added the...
>>>
>>> return 1 if $BlackWhite->{'default'}{$to};
>>>
>>> ...line of code to the function.
>> But the files are all users/domains/default recipients. Each line in 
>> a file gives an entry for the sender going to the user/domain/default 
>> specified by the filename.
> Yes, I understand.  That's why I modified the code with the line above 
> so that it would also check the recipient.
>
> {...snip...}
>>> Well it doesn't work for me unless I modify the code as indicated in 
>>> my original post.  In my case abuse at our_domain is the only 
>>> recipient.  Looking at the code I don't see a check for the "To:" 
>>> address in the default file.  I see a test for $from, $fromdomain, 
>>> and $ip.  I don't see a check for $to.  That's why I added the line 
>>> of code.
>> There isn't the $to check as the filenames are named after the 
>> recipient users/domains/default. The contents of each file lists the 
>> senders that are black/whitelisted for the addresses described by the 
>> filename.
>>
> So you're saying that the bydomain white list (and blacklist for that 
> matter) entries are all aimed at allowing/disallowing senders to 
> particular users/domains.  It has nothing to do with the recipient.
Yes. You are aiming to achieve something I didn't design the original to 
do, it was all intended for incoming mail to your customers. That's why 
you need to change it, you are trying to do something different.
>   (That's what I was attempting to achieve with my modification -- 
> which worked by the way.)
>
> This means there is no way for me to have a mailbox (abuse at wvnet.edu) 
> setup such that mail from anyone at anywhere to that address gets 
> delivered and not flagged as spam.
Correct.
>
>
> The problem is that I have people on the internet reporting spam 
> coming from our network by sending it to abuse at wvnet.edu.  However, 
> our helpdesk people never see it because it gets detected as spam and 
> deleted.  I tried putting abuse in the wvnet.edu file but it doesn't 
> work since this facility is looking for the sender (who could be 
> anyone) rather than the recipient (abuse at wvnet.edu).
Correct.
>
> I suppose I can get around this by coding a spamassassin rule that 
> gives a large positive value for mail going to abuse at wvnet.edu.  I 
> think I'll just handle it that way since I don't know the 
> ramifications of the mod to the code.
That sounds like an alternative way of doing it.

The other possibility, which is considerably faster, is to put a simple 
ruleset on "Spam Checks =" which says
    To: abuse at wvnet.edu no
    FromOrTo: default yes
As you see there is more than 1 way of achieving this aim.

Hopefully this helps sort you out without having to change any of my 
code at all, which is always better. I hate having to change people's 
code to achieve something, when there is another way of doing it. Code 
changes tend to make maintenance a nightmare in future years.

-- 
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.