Re: bayes db site wide or per user

[Alex Handle]

Theo Van Dinter schrieb:

On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 09:44:04PM +0100, Alex Handle wrote:

postfix/mysql/nfs/amavisd-new/spamassassin and now we

Is it a bad idea to use a site wide bayes database or is it better
to use a per user database in this scenario?


Per user DBs will give you better results, but since you're running from
the MTA, your only choice is site-wide.



I could disable the spamchecks in amavisd-new and invoke sa through
maildrop.
But i don't know if a per-user database would scale for 100,000 mailboxes?

bayes db site wide or per user

[Alex Handle]

Hi to all,

a month a go we implemented a mailcluster based on
postfix/mysql/nfs/amavisd-new/spamassassin and now we
would like to add bayesian filtering to the system.
Our Cluster is designed to scale for about 100 000 mailboxes.

The users should forward spam and ham to sa-learn by
sending the mails as attachment to a specific address:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

or

[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Is it a bad idea to use a site wide bayes database or is it better
to use a per user database in this scenario?
How resistent is a site wide setup with a lot of mailboxes against
poisoning?

Thanks!

Alex

first received header forged

[Alex Handle]

Hi,

recently i saw a lot of spam that didn't get catched by spamassassin.
All the messages have in common that the first received header ist forged.

Here an example:

Received: from 141.88.223.236 (HELO mx1.ihk.de)
 by mydomain.at with esmtp (08E71A-P)@7X K0'+V)
 id 76)4Y6-5>0O4:-+8
 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 01:20:50 +0180
From: "Annmarie Esposito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

They use the recipient domain (virtual domain on our mailcluster)
as the servername in the received line.

Is there a way to write a custom rule for this scenario?
I have set trusted and internal_networks to our public mailserver subnet.


Thanks!

Alex Handle