Paul Aviles wrote: > Matt, thanks for taking the time to answer me. > > Matt Kettler wrote: > >> Erm.. that would disable RBLs in both sendmail AND spamassassin.. >> Clearly not what you want. >> > > More confused... OK got the part that SA is only a labeling filter. I made > the mistake of implying that anyone using SA will also use procmailrc rules > to rid of spam based on a score number like 10, seems like a good thing to > do anyway.. > Many folks do like the idea, despite the development team strongly recommending not doing this. I myself do not do this, I leave it up to my users to decide.
However, it should also be noted that before you used the word "reject". Reject has a specific meaning. To reject mail means to generate a 5xx error code during the SMTP transfer. Procmail can never reject mail as it's called after the SMTP session is over. Auto-deleting is not the same as rejecting. Post-delivery bouncing is also not the same, and is liable to get you blacklisted in spamcop. > The RBLS is sendmail actually discard the email so they are rejected. What > is the purpose of SA using RBL's then if the emails will be rejected? > Well, first, maybe you don't trust some, or all, RBLs enough to use them as a sole-source reject criteria. Those RBLs can be used in SA on a scored basis, which counts towards tagging the message as spam. Personally, I have yet to find any RBL out there with a low enough FP rate to use as a reject criteria. Even XBL has too many FP's for me to trust it absolutely. But that's my own personal opinions. You might be more willing to accept loss of mail than I am. Also, SA's RBL checks check all the IPs in all the received: headers, not just the one IP that delivered mail to your network. (notable exception is the DUL RBLs) > > >> No. This has nothing to do with procmail locks. >> Why is your AWL database in /etc/mail/spamassassin? That's dangerous. >> > > Hmm... That is the default is I am not mistaken... Plain configuration from > the tar.gz from SA.org. > Interesting.. do you have any users in your passwd file with a home directory of /etc/mail? > >> Fix your auto_whitelist_path to point somewhere that can be written to >> (and DO NOT fix this by making the site config dir writable by the SA >> process.) Or better yet, delete it, and make sure your users have valid >> home directories. >> > > >> Ditto bayes_path. >> > > You lost me... I thought that AWL had a "global" server one and also each > user a unique one. Wrong? > Wrong. There's only one AWL and one Bayes database used at a time. It can be configured to be one global server-wide bayes, or per-user (default), not both. > Thanks > > Paul > > > >
