Jeremy,
> > Don't set recip_done to true, just add_contents_category().
>
> OK, but...
>
> > If you do set recip_done, you must also set recip_smtp_response(...),
> > indicating the success status of a delivery that you pretended
> > to have done.
>
> So I could do this if I wanted to have control over the SMTP response.
Yes, but only if it is your custom hook code that sets recip_done to true,
indicating (or faking) it performed a delivery. Otherwise the status
code will be overwritten by some later code section which does a delivery
and sets recip_done to true.
> > Turning off quarantinining is trickier - I can't think
> > of an elegant way to do it from a custom hook.
> > I admit it would be useful.
>
> Can I set the quarantine method ($banned_files_quarantine_method) to
> undef() or something like that?
Not really - doing so would change a global setting for the lifetime
of this process, affecting future messages checked by this child process.
Some other trick will need to be devised (like adding a new variable
or a recipient object property), with a corresponding supporting change
in the base code.
> > There is no involvement of attachents concept there, all MIME
> > parts are treated equally.
>
> Yes, for a single-part MIME with no other parts. However what about a
> plain RFC2822 message without any MIME?
It is still a tree of MIME parts, a small one with a single node.
> In particular, some of the
> base code, do_notify_and_quarantine(), looks at $r->banned_parts,
It will contain a list of just one element, the plain mail body part.
Actually the list may even be empty, in case of no body and no
header/body separator line.
> but if I haven't set any banned parts, I might break something. I suspect
> this will only break template macros related to banned attachments,
> which I can deal with. But I'd like to be sure that there isn't a bit
> of code that assumes a banned attachment is always present in a banned
> message.
It shouldn't break anything. If it does, it needs to be fixed.
> My reading of the release notes suggests that I can check the virus
> status of the message before performing an action, because the custom
> checks() happens after the built-in checks. Assuming that's correct,
> what's the best way to do this?
Right.
> Should I test $r->is_in_contents_category(CC_VIRUS) per recipient?
> Or can I do it for the entire message with
> $msginfo->is_in_contents_category(CC_VIRUS)?
The $msginfo has a CC_VIRUS set if a virus was found.
Probably this is what you want.
A recipient's object has a CC_VIRUS set if a virus was found AND this
particular recipient DOES NOT have a bypass_virus_checks_maps set.
As you already know, the is_in_contents_category test for presence
of a contents category, but this is not necessary a blocking ccat,
e.g. when a recipient is a virus lover.
> Sorry, one more question: Can I determine, from within a custom hook,
> what is the currently loaded policy bank?
Yes, the c('policy_bank_path') returns a string, which is a
slash-separated list of currently loaded policy bank names.
Same as provided by a macro %p.
Mark
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
AMaViS-user mailing list
AMaViS-user@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amavis-user
AMaViS-FAQ:http://www.amavis.org/amavis-faq.php3
AMaViS-HowTos:http://www.amavis.org/howto/
