On 13 Oct 2006, at 13:06, Ian Eiloart wrote: > > > --On 13 October 2006 10:13:39 +0100 Philip Hazel > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> >> Providing "per user" scanning options is difficult because of the >> problem of multiple recipients per message. Providing two or three >> different scanning options that users can opt into is easier, by >> temporarily rejecting (in the RCPT ACL) additional recipients that >> have >> a different setting to the first (and saving the option in a >> variable). >> I think there's info somewhere about how to do that (the wiki?). It's >> untidy, though, and if you have only one IP address, it may delay the >> additional recipients. >> > > Another approach is to scan per user when there's only one > recipient, but > use sitewide settings when there's more than one recipient.
That makes sense or ideally reject if score is higher than the highest user/domain setting Which is in principle easy to do as it only requires a single number to be communicated from the rcpt acl to the data acl > If you're > rejecting spam at SMTP time, then false positives should be > notified to the > sender. > > You could even do a fake reject after DATA (at some reasonable > threshold), > and then deliver the message through spamassassin using personal > spamassassin settings and blackholing unwanted messages. The worst > that can > happen here is that a false positive leaves the sender incorrectly > believing that their message hasn't been delivered. > > > -- > Ian Eiloart > IT Services, University of Sussex > > -- > ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users > ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ > ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/ > -- ## List details at http://www.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://www.exim.org/eximwiki/
