----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Bill wrote: > >>> Is there a way to direct these system messages so that they bypass spam >>> filtering? >>> >>>> http://www200.pair.com/mecham/spam/bypassing.html#11 >>> >>> Thanks Gary, however, the issue I run into with this option is that I >>> run >>> multiple content-filters, and the first one actually pipes mail (via the >>> Postfix "sendmail" command) back into postfix which uses the "pickup" >>> daemon >>> to retrieve the message. Since this content-filter runs before the >>> amavisd content-filter, if I add: >>> >>> pickup fifo n - n 60 1 pickup >>> -o content_filter= >>> >>> then the amavis content-filer does not get called. I have to run the >>> amavis >>> content-filter second in order to for SA to be able to score the header >>> mark-up from the first content-filter. I have not been able to figure >>> out >>> if there is a way to tell "sendmail" to use an alternate "pickup" daemon >>> when piping a message back to Postfix. > > I did not come up with anything. You have the first filter: > > smtp inet n - n - - smtpd > -o content_filter=filter > snfilter unix - n n - 10 pipe > flags=q user=filter argv=/var/spool/filter/filter -f ${sender} > ${recipient} > > which sends everything through the pickup daemon. I could not find a > way for 'pickup' to differentiate mail from <root> (for example) from all > the > other mail. > > You mentioned you are changing the filter to deliver via smtp. I'm > sure this will be more flexible. > > I don't know what this filter does, but moving it to the amavisd-new > reinjection port might be an option. Then you would need to override > the content_filter for the pickup daemon to prevent loops. Downside is > since recipient expansion occurs within amavisd-new, unless I'm wrong, > the filter would be called for each recipient. On the other hand, does > this filter expand the recipients so amavisd-new gets a separate > message for each recipient? If so, you should consider placing the > less efficient filter in front of the more efficient filter (if it > makes sense to do so). I assume when a message is expanded in > amavisd-new, the reinjection port gets one separate message for each > recipient. I wrote a script that delivers the post-scanned MessageSniffer message directly to amavisd-new on 127.0.0.1:10024 by using the smtpclient to handle the delivery instead the Postfix sendmail client. This appears to be working great, and allows me to bypass content filtering on the Postfix "pickup" daemon. Chaining the content-filters together also reduces the number of message hand-offs and also cuts down on the amount of Postfix logging. The message delivery process now looks like: Postfix --> MessageSniffer --> Amavisd-new --> Postfix --> Maildrop --> Dovecot, removing the Postfix hand-off between MessageSniffer and Amavisd-new. Mark, is amavisd-new missing anything that I should be concerned about by having mail injected via SMTP vs. ESMTP? I noticed that Postfix delivers to Amavisd via ESMTP, but the smtpclient delivers via SMTP. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ 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/
