spam.blacklist.rules Syntax question

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at gmail.com
Mon Mar 5 16:19:47 CET 2007


On 05/03/07, Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/03/07, am.lists <am.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> (snip)
> > > > Would this be better moved to a postfix block instead of where I'm
> > > > [attempting] to do it?
> > > Might be a good idea, saves even more.
> >
> > The only downside is I don't get the instrumentation of how effective
> > my blocking is if I do it there, right?
> >
> Quite true. Blocking later in the processing will give you more
> information to work with... The question you should perhaps ask
> yourself is "is it worth it";-).
But (unless my memory fails me completely ... I cannot use things like
this due to laws/policy... Don't ask) you should still get a fairly
informative log entry to the effect that it had been dropped... Unless
you use FW rules to do the blocking:)

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


More information about the MailScanner mailing list