Request for comments 3

[Glenn Steen]

On 24/07/07, DAve <dave.list at pixelhammer.com> wrote:
> Julian Field wrote:
> >
> >
> > Steve Freegard wrote:
> >> Hi Jules,
> >>
> >> Julian Field wrote:
> >>> How about now? It's not in MCP yet, is that a problem? Shouldn't be,
> >>> as it shouldn't actually make much difference to this functionality
> >>> (it is working off SA rule names, not scores, so it doesn't matter if
> >>> other rules fire as well).
> >>
> >> Exactly what I was thinking - wouldn't this new method enable MCP-type
> >> things but without the need for a second SA run (and the rather large
> >> associated overhead of doing this).
> >>
> >> You could simply create the MCP rules and score them as 0.001, then
> >> use the new feature to quarantine if any of the MCP rule actually fire.
> >>
> >> The only thing lacking here is the ability to quarantine the file in
> >> the mcp quarantine instead of the spam quarantine.  Maybe adding
> >> 'store:mcp' could be an option to mark the message as MCP and store in
> >> the MCP quarantine directory???
> > I have just added 4 more actions:
> > store-nonspam
> > store-spam
> > store-nonmcp
> > store-mcp
> > The original "store" action is still there and will work exactly how it
> > always has done.
>
> So can we believe that a dir structure like so is setup?
>
> store-nonspam and store-nonmcp are stored here,
> /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/[date]/
That would be the "infections" quarantine... those should go to
non-spam (and possibly non-mcp?! Haven't looked at code today... to
much to do;-).

> store-spam is stored here,
> /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/[date]/spam/
>
> store-mcp is stored here,
> /var/spool/MailScanner/quarantine/[date]/mcp/
>
> DAve
>

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