> > mouss wrote: > > > stunnel may be more appropriate, and easier to setup and control than > > > ssh, in this particular case.
> On Wed, 4 Feb 2009, Jason Haar wrote: > > What's wrong with spamc's native "--ssl" mode - plus a simple ACL at the > > spamd end to limit who can reach it? Chances are there's a firewall > > involved in this situation anyway... On 03.02.09 21:39, Andre wrote: > spamc is never called from Exim in this case, so the --ssl switch can't be > used. At least that is my understanding (maybe mis-understanding?) of the > situation. Doesn't exim even have the option for running spamc? If so, that's serious bug I'd say... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm.
