Adding ASN info

Lars Kristiansen lars+lister.mailscanner at
Wed May 21 18:19:36 IST 2008

Alex Broens skrev:
> On 5/21/2008 5:55 PM, Julian Field wrote:
>> Alex Broens wrote:
>>> On 5/21/2008 3:29 PM, Lars Kristiansen wrote:
>>>> Hugo van der Kooij skrev:
>>>>> Steve Freegard wrote:
>>>>> | Hugo van der Kooij wrote:
>>>>> |> Has anyone done any work on adding ASN info to a message in the 
>>>>> way this
>>>>> |> procmail filter does it? I would prefer to do this in postfix 
>>>>> but a
>>>>> |> custom call in MailScanner before SA is called upon would do as 
>>>>> well.
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |>
>>>>> |> It sounds like a fun idea to let the ASN info become part of the
>>>>> |> Bayesian selection. And we might add a decision to block all 
>>>>> messages
>>>>> |> from certain countries. All I ever got from Nigeria are 
>>>>> messages with
>>>>> |> wacky deals.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | SpamAssassin can do this natively if you want to Bayes to 
>>>>> consider the
>>>>> ASN:
>>>>> |
>>>>> |
>>>>> So adding the 3 lines indicated to
>>>>> /etc/MailScanner/spam.assassin.prefs.conf should be sufficient to add
>>>>> the ASN info?
>>>>> One of the side effects of getting something to kill the pain in my
>>>>> spine is that it makes it a bit harder to think logical. But it beats
>>>>> the pain so I can work out that problem that locks up my spinal 
>>>>> column.
>>>>> So I have to accept the side effects this week.
>>>>> Hugo.
>>>> No success here.
>>>> The ASN-plugin in spamassassin adds a header: X-Spam-ASN
>>>> It does work for me with spamassassin -D but not in mailscanner.
>>>> Should this work in mailscanner to add a header with a 
>>>> spamassassin-plugin?
>>> If you add the add_header directive and use SA to run regex against 
>>> it, it works, "virually", but MS won't write it in the msg because 
>>> MS doesn't know about these directives (and probably never will)
>>> Take in account that if you're boxes are hi traffic, this will slow 
>>> down your processing.
>> It takes quite a bit of time to look it up, and adds *Very* little 
>> helpful information in working out the spaminess of the message. So I 
>> have no plans to add support for it as yet another special case.
> Jules
> the add_headers are of great use and can be used,  the fact that 
> they're not written makes it harder to catch patterns but they get hit 
> if applied.
> for example, adding :
> add_header all Relays-External _RELAYSEXTERNAL_
> add_header all Relays-Untrusted _RELAYSUNTRUSTED_
> to triggers a bunch of rules.
> many times you'll see the hits but wonder where they come from... and 
> that's what we miss if MS doesn't write them.
> Not a real Prio, but it would be a *very_nice_to_have*
> but what's more important, relax and let the Docs do the magic on your 
> body...
> take care
> Alex

Thanks for the explanations. Some of it looks clearer now.

Thumbs up for the magic!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list