Exceptions to the rules.

[Stef Morrell]

On 05/12/2013 12:46, Martin Hepworth wrote:
> and those rules are before the default action line in the
> scan.messages.rules files?

The full file is..

From: safesender at blah.com no
...etc
To: *@DomainsThatShouldBeScanned.com yes
...etc
FromOrTo: default no

So - Exceptions first with a no, stuff I want scanned second with a yes and finally a default no for everything else.

>
> --
> Martin Hepworth, CISSP
> Oxford, UK
>
>
> On 5 December 2013 10:06, Stef Morrell <stef at aoc-uk.com
> <mailto:stef at aoc-uk.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     Running MailScanner 4.84.5-3 with Postfix 2.5.1
>
>     Assuming a domain receipt.com <http://receipt.com> for which
>     incoming email is normally scanned. I need to make an exception for
>     a couple of known safe senders, so that email they send is never
>     scanned at all, even when addressed to receipt.com <http://receipt.com>
>
>     This may not be the most sensible plan in the universe, but it is
>     the one I have been tasked with by the man who signs my paycheck!
>
>     My understanding is that I can have in MailScanner.conf a line
>
>     Scan Messages = %rules-dir%/scan.messages.rules
>
>     And then in scan.messages.rules, lines of the form
>
>     From: safesender at domain.com <mailto:safesender at domain.com> no
>     From: safesender2 at domain.com <mailto:safesender2 at domain.com> And To:
>     recipient at receipt.com <mailto:recipient at receipt.com> no
>     To: receipt.com <http://receipt.com> yes
>
>     And this will completely bypass MS for those senders (optionally
>     only when sending to stated recipient).
>
>     Nevertheless, the sender's emails are being quarantined, as they
>     contain attachments normally stopped by the file content rules.
>
>     I've tried also adding the safe senders into a content ruleset to
>     try and get them through the system, but this hasn't helped either.
>
>     I presume I am missing something here. What do I need to do, in
>     order to have MS honour such exceptions to the normal rules?
>
>     Thanks
>
>     Stef