David F. Skoll wrote: > Matthew Schumacher wrote: > >> Noooooooooooo!!!!!! Not silently discard!!!! > > Yes, silently discard. > > But wait! CanIt, out of the box, *NEVER EVER* rejects or discards > an e-mail unless a human being tells it to. > > Now, you can tune the settings so that it will in fact reject or > discard e-mail without intervention, but unless you've been insanely > aggressive in your settings, even rejected/discarded e-mails create an > "incident" in the database so you can see what happened, as well as look > over the first 8kB of the mail to see what you might have missed. > >> Perhaps a better solution for me would be to to make filter_end accept >> if any one user accepts it, then for the users that reject it, call >> delete_recipient then email the sender an error message from mimedefang >> sourced from a black hole account. > > Sending the sender an error message will very quickly get you blacklisted > as a source of backscatter. That's the unfortunate reality. >
Isn't spam wonderful :| Here is a thought, what about declaring which users accepted and which rejected in the rejection message. So if recipient A wants everything tagged and recipient B wants spam rejected, then we reject the message with "Recipient B thinks this is spam (message was delivered to other recipients)" then in filter_end we queue the message for recipient A. This way the error message always declares what is going on, the sender knows what happened, recipient A always gets their email, there is never silently discarded email, and we are not sending backscatter to the Internet. Do you think this will work? schu _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
