Bernd Plagge wrote: > I don't disagree with you but I don't like the idea to check spam - > which gets rejected - for viruses.
Well, if you run the spamassassin filter before clamav, and messages are rejected as spam, then they won't be scanned for viruses. I don't recommend that, though. Virus scanning should be something that you provide to everyone. Even your own users shouldn't be able to send viruses to other users. I would run clamav first, and scan everything. Run clamav even before your whitelist filters. > I know that depending on the return code you continue filtering or not > but wouldn't it make sense to have a sort of "final filter step"? You > could then run the virus check on everything being left. Yes, that capability exists. That's how the whitelist filters work. If a filter returns a '2xx' status, then the message will be accepted and no more pythonfilters will run. Since pythonfilters are run sequentially, and there's only one chance to bail out, that feature is really only useful for the whitelist filters. You couldn't really apply it to the spamassassin filter. Basically, filters always check on everything "being left". Each filter has an opportunity to mark the message good (accepted, no more scanning), or mark the message bad (rejected, no more scanning), or do nothing (the remaining filters will run). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users
