Peter Bowyer wrote:
> 2008/11/21 WJCarpenter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> We use SpamAssassin for spam-scoring, and all local recipients have a
>> threshold score, above which a message automatically gets filed into a
>> spam folder.
>>
>> We are planning to implement a different threshold score, above which a
>> message gets rejected at SMTP time.  For the case of multi-recipient
>> messages, the SA score must exceed the maximum of all of the recipient
>> reject thresholds for us to reject the message.  (A recipient that we
>> don't host is considered to have a threshold of some impossibly high
>> number since we have no way of knowing their preferences.)
>>
>> Our plan is to do all these lookups and arithmetic using $recipients in
>> the DATA ACL after SA scanning.
>>
>> Does anyone see any problems with this approach?  TIA
> 
> The principle is good. You might find the implementation easier if you
> calculate the high-water-mark reject score in the RCPT acl and pass it
> through to the DATA acl in an acl_m variable.
> 
> Peter
> 
> 

As a long-term experiment, (12 months + ) we did basically that:

  - as we 'cycled' thru each new recipient in acl_smtp_rcpt, we 
re-calculated the min/max thresholds for 'most generous' and 'least 
generous' within that 'batch' of recipients.

Once into acl_smtp_data:

  - if the most-generous (least paranoid) would reject, we rejected all.

  - if the most-generous would NOT reject, but the least-generous WOULD, 
we issued a fake-reject with the message:

'...has been delivered, but may not be read because of [Spam score ___]'

...and sorted those into various levels of 'Suspect' IMAP folders....

At the end of the day, it didn't help *us* much, as thresholds within 
our relatively small per-domain groups tended to be fairly close between 
players.

What has worked better is to accept only one recipient at a time.

Yes, it 'breaks' the standard. But 95% + of our arrivals are 'singleton' 
anyway, so barely noticed by either end.

Until XEXDATA or such is adopted, it is the most straightforward method 
available.

CAVEAT - we aren't an ISP.  Just SME bespoke systems provider. What 
works for an office with 5 to 15 folks won't work for 105 to 15,000.

Jm2CW

Bill

-- 
## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users 
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/

Reply via email to