In response to Noel:

Hi, I'm intrigued by the quick response.  It appears you understand my intentions 
perfectly... to short circuit undesirable traffic ASAP.

I desire the ability to use any filter conceivable, programmable, and available to me 
in order to block unwanted traffic.  In order to respond to various threats in a 
timely 
fashion, I also wish it to be dynamically configurable.  I am not sure if there's a 
way 
or plan to have the james VM reread it's configuration or enable and configure filters 
on the fly, but I can always restart the process.  Personally I wish Julian Haight at 
Spamcop.net would code up a nice mailet that sends incredibly nasty legal notices 
to the originator's ISP on spam detection.  I might have to think about that one.

Concerning the 'acceptOnlyLocal' option, this functionality exists in other mail 
services, and I hate leaving out options.  It does sound as if you've got  better 
mechanism for it planned.  It sends the immediate message that non-local mail is 
not accepted.  If disabled per default, the mail client program knows that the 
message did go into the system even if it doesn't get relayed.  This will not send a 
brain-dead kiddie-script operator the message that he shouldn't bother thwacking 
that server with a further 50K messages.  Sending back a 503 on RCPT will cause 
that error message, and he'll skip me for the next server on his hit list.

The 'doReverseLookups' is just another tool, and you are quite correct, one of 
limited usefulness.  Perhaps a much more verbose and explanatory text description 
of the option is in order, as it will indeed cause false positives and undetected 
negatives.  For the undetected negatives, hopefully another filter or the 
'acceptOnlyLocal' option will catch and kill them.  As for false positives, clearly 
this 
option should not be used for larger or more public servers where this could occur.  
However, for a more private server or one with less traffic, or where the majority of 
the traffic comes from known locations, this can be useful.  This still leaves open a 
source for public email input as opposed to a private AUTHed system.

A matcher which would be interesting would be the reverse of the 
InSpammerBlacklist, accessing a whitelist DNS server which contains only those 
servers from which we will accept traffic.  Does not require AUTH, but affords 
limited acceptibility.  The Habeas Users List would also fit this category ( 
InSpammerBlacklist supports the Habeas Infringers List very well ).  Rename 
InSpammerBlacklist and reverse the two return conditions.  This also sounds like a 
candidate for the new filtering in v3.  Chroot'ing a bind server and adding these 
whitelisted hosts is not difficult, but could be done within the code as well.

On the Firewall block mailet: the mailet I have is getting older by the word as I 
realize more clearly what needs to be done... a configurable command line string 
with replaceable token parameters for the desired IP to block, timeout in seconds, 
and any other pertinent data.  I'm using a small shell script to add iptables rules, 
and 
a daemonized perl script to time out the rules. I didn't think this mailet was 
particularly limited to use on Linux... although I don't know of other firewall 
mechanisms which permit rule addition/deletion via command line.  I would only be 
able to provide the Linux iptables example, not sure why ipchains wouldn't be 
extremely similar. This is still limited to Linux, can someone suggest a Windows 
possibility?

PATCH script in next email, but still available on http://www.mdve.net/jakarta-
james/jakarta-james-cvsdiff.txt

Thank you again for your response, it has helped me a great deal.

Roger Venable
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to