rule having an effect on all recipients

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at gmail.com
Tue Jan 27 14:58:30 GMT 2009


2009/1/27 Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle at cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca>:
> Scott Silva a écrit :
>>
>> on 1-26-2009 12:53 PM Marc Delisle spake the following:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I am running 4.70.7-1 and will shortly upgrade to 4.74. My question is
>>> about a rule affecting more than the intended user. Look at this:
>>>
>>> High Scoring Spam Actions = %rules-dir%/highspam.actions.rules
>>>
>>> which contains (obfuscated):
>>>
>>> To: user1 at cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca deliver header "X-Spam-Status: Yes"
>>> To: user2 at cegepsherbrooke.qc.ca deliver header "X-Spam-Status: Yes"
>>> FromOrTo:       default         delete
>>>
>>> So, user1 and user2 want to receive all high scoring spam. But, high
>>> spam messages with user1 or user2 in the list of recipients are
>>> delivered to all recipients. Is this a known problem, or is my syntax
>>> invalid?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Marc Delisle
>>
>> You have to split incoming messages for rules like that to work.
>> There are howto's for postfix and sendmail in the wiki.
>
> Thanks. I read
> http://wiki.mailscanner.info/doku.php?id=documentation:configuration:mta:postfix:how_to:split_mails_per_recipient
> but this howto is scary ("murderous overhead" and increased complexity for
> quarantine releasing).
>
> Marc Delisle
Well, I wanted it to reflect some form of the true state of things,
not a rosy "all will be well if you do...." thing:-).
One could possibly make things simpler (perhaps make it work with a
single instance of postfix), and definitely structure the document a
bit better, but ... I've lacked the time:(. And the added complexity
would still be there, since the basic concept would need be the same
(that the "instance" listening on port 25 would need "deliver" to the
second smtpd (on port 10026) to facilitate the per-recipient split),
and the added load would be the same.

Now, if your system isn't a high volume system... it is both rather
more easy to set up and maintain than it looks. If you use MailWatch,
you could probably do some intelligent SQL to see how many more
messages MailScanner would see (or do some log analysis:-)... And
remember that if you use the SpaAssassin result cache, that will
likely lighten the load a fair bit.

Anyway, if you really need it... it really works;-).

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


More information about the MailScanner mailing list