On 2015-01-18 19:53, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 07:41:15PM +0000, m...@ruggedinbox.com wrote:
Hi ok we double checked and this is the source of an email sent from
m...@ruggedinbox.com to m...@ruggedinbox.com:
Return-Path: <vm...@ruggedinbox.com>
Delivered-To: m...@ruggedinbox.com
[...]
so it looks like 'Return-Path: <vm...@ruggedinbox.com>' is added.
We have some 'R' flag enabled in master.cf:
dovecot unix - n n - - pipe
flags=DRhu user=vmail:vmail argv=/usr/lib/dovecot/deliver -d
${recipient}
Why do you believe that adding Return-Path on final delivery is a
problem? It is rather a requirement IMHO.
spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe
flags=R user=debian-spamd argv=/usr/bin/spamc -e /usr/sbin/sendmail
-oi -f
${sender} ${recipient}
do you think the problem is here ?
This is not final delivery, don't use "R" here. And don't forget "--"
before the recipient list.
spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe
flags=R user=debian-spamd
argv=/usr/bin/spamc -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
Postfix does its best to protect you with:
http://www.postfix.org/postconf.5.html#allow_min_user
but it is best to not rely on that too much.
That Return-Path header causes problems with some services, for example
ebay, which uses 'vm...@ruggedinbox.com' instead of the sender address.
It also causes problems when delivery is failed, the returning email
with the error is sometime sent to vm...@ruggedinbox.com instead of the
sender address.
About the spamassassin rule, you mean that the correct definition should
be
spamassassin unix - n n - - pipe
user=debian-spamd
argv=/usr/bin/spamc -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -f ${sender} --
${recipient}
?
