Franz Stancl wrote: > Jesse Guardiani wrote: > >>Virus >>filtering is system wide, as a matter of policy, >>because we don't think it's ethical to knowingly >>store viruses on our disks. >> > That is a funny way of saying "We don't want to fill up our harddisks > with tons of stupid virus emails" ;)
Disk space is a factor, but really it's more than that. We don't want our mail server spewing viruses, and we don't want it to infect our customers if we can possibly prevent it. We considered charging for virus scanning. After all, it takes up a TON of CPU, but I personally don't agree ethically with that sort of thing, and our customers appreciate the value-added service. In fact, we had a mid-sized customer leave us and come back because they received too many viruses and too much spam through the new ISP. So I guess we made the right choice. >>Anyway, the web interface can wait, but right >>now I really need some way to add, remove, and >>re-order filters on a per mailbox basis *without* >>making qmailadmin choke to death on the strange >>dot-qmail syntax. I figure the only way to do >>this is to use some third party filtering >>application, like maybe maildrop, as qmailadmin's >>"spam command". This way filtering can be turned >>on and off quickly, and qmailadmin understands >>the dot-qmail syntax. >> >> > I do the same here for my users. Using maildrop in connection with > spamassassin using qmailadmin to turn it on/off. > You can configure spamassassin that way that it looks into the users > spamassassin configfile (in the vpopmail dir of the user). How do you get spamassassin to look in the user's vpopmail dir when all you can pass to maildrop via "spam command" is the global maildrop config file? So basically you're using maildrop with just one filter: spamassassin? Or is your setup configurable to allow more than one filter on a per user basis? > The user can tweak his spamassassin preferences with some kind of > webinterface: > When I got that one it was called "WebUserPrefs" and I think it was from > the spamassasin website. > It is not perfect (you can't create new rules, only black/whitelists, > change the threshold, etc), but it might be useful for a start. Definitely sounds good. I'll check it out. We tried spamassassin a few years ago, but the false positive ratio was too high. We use TMDA for filtering now, and it's nearly 100% effective, but we're looking to implement either a spamassassin/dspam + TMDA hybrid solution or just a configurable spamassassin/dspam solution for the user that needs something lighter than TMDA that still stops a good bit of spam. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net
