Mark wrote:
> Richard,
>> If I wanted to only perform spam-handling for specific user email
>> addresses and allow all other email to the domain to avoid
>> spam-handling, would the following work:
>>
>> @spam_lovers_maps = ( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
>> @local_domains_maps = ( [".xyz.com"] );
>>
>> where $MYHOME_/spam_lovers contains:
>>
>> # Perform spam-handling for these users
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> # All other users opt out of spam-handling
>> .xyz.com
> Almost, but you got the syntax wrong.
> You are using a syntax for ACL but using a hash lookup.
> You can either do:
> @spam_lovers_maps = ( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
> # All other users opt out of spam-handling
> # (no right-hand side implies true)
> .xyz.com
> Or use a lookup list instead of a hash:
> spam_lovers_maps = ( read_array("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> # All other users opt out of spam-handling
> .xyz.com
> Mark
In addition to Marks reply,
what is listed above will not actually bypass spam checks for .xyz.com.
Spam checks will be performed for all these users, but for .xyz.com, they
will receive the spam regardless of what $final_spam_destiny is set
to. If you were to set $final_spam_destiny = D_PASS, there would be no
functional difference between the two sets of users listed here.
To save some SpamAssassin processing, and further differentiate these two
groups, I believe you could use the same table to also bypass spam checks:
@bypass_spam_checks_maps = ( read_hash("$MYHOME/spam_lovers") );
# bypass_spam_checks = false for these users
# spam_lovers = false for these users
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 0
# All other users opt out of spam-handling
# (no right-hand side implies true)
.xyz.com
This will not prevent spam scanning if a message is addressed to both
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] (you would not want it to). If I am
correct, I think it's a good idea to use both bypass_spam_checks and
virus_lovers for those who wish to be excluded from spam processing.
Correct me if I am wrong.
Gary V
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
AMaViS-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user
AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3
AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
