This is a port, not part of the OpenBSD base system.  You should take this up 
with the port maintainer and the author of smtp-vilter.

Aaron Jackson [jack...@msrce.howard.edu] wrote:
> Irene killed my firewall/web server/mail sever, so I'm in the process of
> recreating its setup with the current 4.9 release. I was running into a
> problem with making smtp-vilter (installed from a package) work the way I
> expected it to work. Specifically, the virus backend via clamav and the spam
> backend via spam assassin worked fine but I could never get the attachment
> backend to work. I kept getting the following message in maillog whenever I
> sent an unwanted attachment:
> 
> Sep  2 12:54:52 mushmouth smtp-vilter[32388]: failed to replace message body
> 
> After banging my head for a couple of days (I did search google and the
> mailing list without luck) I was able to trace the error message to line 1817
> of engine.c:
> 
>         if ((virus_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (error_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (spam_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (unwanted_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT))
>                 desc.xxfi_flags |= SMFIF_CHGBODY;
> 
> It turns out that for unwanted content, when smtp-vilter registers with
> sendmail, it never sets the change body flag because STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT
> is not an allowed strategy for unwanted content. I made the following change
> then rebuilt and re-installed, and things seem to work as expected.
> 
>         if ((virus_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (error_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (spam_strategy == STRATEGY_NOTIFY_RECIPIENT)
>             || (unwanted_strategy == STRATEGY_MARK))
>                 desc.xxfi_flags |= SMFIF_CHGBODY;
> 
> It seems like a bug to me, but then again the code is a bit complex and I
> don't fully understand it. I was just wondering if anybody had any thoughts
> about this "fix." I don't know if this will effect anything. Anyway, reading
> code is very educational and I did learn a few things in the process.
> 
> Aaron

-- 
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff

Reply via email to