rule having an effect on all recipients

Glenn Steen glenn.steen at
Tue Jan 27 15:17:18 GMT 2009

2009/1/27 Glenn Steen <glenn.steen at>:
> 2009/1/27 Marc Delisle <Marc.Delisle at>:
>> 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 deliver header "X-Spam-Status: Yes"
>>>> To: user2 at 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
>> 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

I just checked on my hosts, and for me ... the increase wouldn't be
that bad... 16% more messages.
Still, I don't employ any per-recipient rulesets, so I don't need
this... Ergo, I don't use it:-).
> likely lighten the load a fair bit.
> Anyway, if you really need it... it really works;-).

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

More information about the MailScanner mailing list