Reports about newest beta

Jonas A. Larsen jonas at
Tue Aug 18 15:22:39 IST 2009

Thanks for answering my questions, here comes my follow up ones :)

> > Is this the normal designed behavior? If yes is it customizeable
> > somehow? As in can I control where the “kill mails” are stored.
> >
> They are put in the quarantine relying on the other quarantine settings
> in MailScanner.conf, such as storing the whole message and so on.

Wouldn't it make most sense to put them in a "crashmails" folder what ever
it would be named the same as spam and nonspam?

Not important I guess, would just make it more mmm coherent is the word i

> >
> >
> You can do that by assigning different SpamAssassin scores to the header
> values in SpamAssassin. The SpamVirus-Report header is passed to
> SpamAssassin, so you can have different rules triggering off different
> "spamvirus" names giving different scores for different types of
> spamvirus. So you can do this perfectly simply.

Hmm i guess that implies that the name of the actual virus is put in the
headers, I've never managed to actually see a header since its always
blocked and quarantined, and the quarantine mails don’t have the MS headers.
But I will look into that.

> >
> > Was there a technical reason why this option isn’t possible to set in
> > a ruleset, or did you just think it would be overkill?
> >
> A very good technical reason. And because it's totally unnecessary as
> you can already implement exactly the same thing better in a bunch of
> SpamAssassin rules. Take a look in the new spam.assassin.prefs.conf
> (right at the bottom) and you will see a very simple rule for assigning
> a spam score when this header is present. You can expand that rule into
> multiple rules triggering on different texts, assigning different scores
> to each one.

Was the last part I was missing.

> I explained all of this in the ChangeLog entry for 4.78, please read it.

I did read it, I guess it wasn't clear enough for me to grasp at first try.
> >
> > Overall the new beta seems to be running fine except for the mails
> > which appears to make it crash, I have not looked into detail about
> > the mails (it was actually test mails) but ile do that later on.
> >
> That's the whole point of the crash-protection system.
> >
> > Hope you survived my longish rant
> >
> I did, but I honestly don't know why I bothered...

to be nice? :)

Med venlig hilsen / Best regards
Jonas Akrouh Larsen
TechBiz ApS
Laplandsgade 4, 2. sal
2300 København S
Office: 7020 0979
Direct: 3336 9974
Mobile: 5120 1096
Fax:    7020 0978

More information about the MailScanner mailing list