Thank you Matt!
Your letter helped me to understand my problem better.
I`m not using sa-spamc, my exim using ACL spam, that connects directly
to spamd ip/port.
My founded solution was described in Exim FAQ:
A0512: Envelope-To: is added at delivery time, by the transport.
Therefore, the header doesn't exist at filter time. In a user filter, the
values you probably
want are in $original_local_part and $original_domain. In a system filter, the
complete list
of all envelope recipients is in $recipients.
Incorrect lines - commented, now working config of ACL spam looks like:
warn message = X-Spam-Score: $spam_score ($spam_bar)
spam = $recipients
# spam = $h_to
warn message = X-Spam-Report: $spam_report
spam = $recipients
# spam = $h_to
> Stop passing extra garbage in the -u parameter to spamc?
> The "some text" part can't legally occur in a RCPT TO: command (which is
> not a header). Did you mean are you extracting the entire contents of
> the To: header?
> spamc isn't designed to parse all that extra data off, username or
> usern...@domain only.
> I'd try to find a way to get the RCPT TO not the To: anyway. The To:
> header might not contain the actual recipient and isn't a useful header
> for selecting user prefs. (i.e.: posts sent to mailing lists are RCPT
> TO: you, but they are To: the list) This is precisely why SA doesn't try
> to parse the To: header and use that for selecting prefs.. It is often
> misleading.
>> But I found a bug, when I`m using whitelist, and header rcpt to: have
>> address with character description, whitelist failed to catch it in
>> database. For example:
>>
>> 1st message:
>> spamd: clean message (-91.7/10.0) for t...@localdomain.com:501 in 8.2
>> seconds, 13522829 bytes.
>>
>> 2nd message:
>> spamd: identified spam (9.2/5.0) for some text <t...@localdomain.com>:501 in
>> 8.3 seconds, 14874071 bytes.
Thank you!
Wbr,
Good luck with spam fight!
