On 2017-08-11, Rob Gunther via Exim-users <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, router based is what I was looking at. Here is a rundown of what I am > trying to do. Let me say that there are NO local users on the machine at > all. It is just for processing mail in, scan for spam, process some SPF > stuff etc. and then back out for delivery. > > When a message comes in, I am using acl_smtp_data to check messages for > spam. The spam checker has no idea who the user is, just gives its opinion > of the spam content. > > We do not reject spam in the ACL, we accept all of it. > > We store the spam score and recipients to a variable in the ACL so the info > can be referenced later. > > Then we drop down into the routers, where we do stuff with SPF, user > aliases, domain aliases etc. One of the routers deals with catch-all, if > the domain uses catch-all direct all unknown recipients to the catch-all > address. > > Then the next router is deciding if the spam should be placed in > quarantine. What was the spam score, what is the user preference etc. One > of the conditions is if the message is a catch-all message or not, if it is > a catch-all message there is no spam quarantine. > > So the decision of the catch-all router is what we are trying to gain > access to. What action is the catch-all router doing and can we act on it > in our quarantine router.
test the same condtions that the catch-all router tested but behave in the opposite way? or perhaps: set redirect_router in the catch all to skip the quarantine router? -- This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software -- ## List details at https://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/
