https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6728

--- Comment #17 from AXB <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to Henrik Krohns from comment #16)
> Well it took a while to come up with an "optimal" solution. Hopefully you
> will like this.
> 
> Sending        lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/AsyncLoop.pm
> Sending        lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Conf.pm
> Sending        lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm
> Transmitting file data ...done
> Committing transaction...
> Committed revision 1842098.
> 
>     dns_block_rule RULE domain
>         If rule named RULE is hit, DNS queries to specified domain are
>         temporarily blocked. Intended to be used with rules that check RBL
>         return codes for specific blocked status. For example:
> 
>           urirhssub URIBL_BLOCKED multi.uribl.com. A 1
>           dns_block_rule URIBL_BLOCKED multi.uribl.com
> 
>         Block status is maintained across all processes by empty statefile in
>         userstate directory (~/.spamassassin/dnsblock_multi.uribl.com).
> 
>     dns_block_time (default: 300)
>         dns_block_rule query blockage will last this many seconds.
> 
> It's extremely simple, works also with spamd, and takes no resources at all,
> one stat() call per dns_block_rule per message is not even worth mentioning
> nor debating.
> 
> I figured 5 minutes would be a better value than hour, in case something
> goes wrong (bad dns response of such?), then it's not blocked for too long.
> Imo, someone making max dozens of requests per 5 minutes or 1 hour makes
> zero difference. Also there will be more warns in log this way.
> 
> Must be enclosed with feature_dns_block_rule
> 
> if can(Mail::SpamAssassin::Conf::feature_dns_block_rule)
> dns_block_rule SURBL_BLOCKED multi.surbl.org
> dns_block_rule URIBL_BLOCKED multi.uribl.com
> dns_block_rule RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED list.dnswl.org
> endif
> 
> Waiting for approval to commit that :-)

I like it - you have my +1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to