Re: [Mimedefang] sa-update

2006-04-28 Thread David F. Skoll
John Nemeth wrote: $path =~ s/__local_state_dir__/$self-{LOCAL_STATE_DIR} || ''/ges; $self-{LOCAL_STATE_DIR} is set by the caller, unfortunately. :-( Regards, David. ___ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above

[Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Dirk the Daring
I've noticed a lot of dictionary spamming of late, and I was thinking of enhancing my filter_recipient to help stop it. Right now, I basically use filter_recipient to look for a HELO claiming to be me, or for an E-Mail headed to my whitelist request address. What I'd like to add is

Re: [Mimedefang] Using filter_recipient without using the rest?

2006-04-28 Thread David F. Skoll
Paul Boven wrote: Do you have any suggestions on disabling mimedefang (except for filter_recipient)? Would this be a usefull feature? That's not a bad idea; perhaps I'll add a flag for this. However, the overhead of plain MIMEDefang on a message is fairly low; we get scan times of a few

Re: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread David F. Skoll
Dirk the Daring wrote: 1) Is filter_recipient called for each RCPT TO: Yes. 2) The documentation states that if filter_recipient returns DISCARD, the message is discarded for ALL Recipients. Is this also true of REJECT (as would also appear to be

Re: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Jan Pieter Cornet
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 08:41:22AM -0400, Dirk the Daring wrote: 1) Is filter_recipient called for each RCPT TO: (as would appear to be the case), or at DATA? At RCPT To: 2) The documentation states that if filter_recipient returns DISCARD, the

OT: Re: [Mimedefang] sa-update

2006-04-28 Thread SRAR Mail Administrator
David F. Skoll wrote: Adam Lanier wrote: evil but useful??? Yes, unfortunately. I have a pretty jaundiced eye, though, and think that any code more complex than Hello World is probably evil. :-) Oh, David... That was priceless. You've just created my latest sig, it will be attributed to

RE: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Matthew.van.Eerde
Dirk the Daring wrote: What I'd like to add is something to check validity of local recipients You could do that without getting MIMEDefang involved at all by generating a sendmail access map. Export the list of valid email addresses from your destination MTA periodically, build an access

RE: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Jeff Rife
On 28 Apr 2006 at 9:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dirk the Daring wrote: What I'd like to add is something to check validity of local recipients Export the list of valid email addresses from your destination MTA periodically, build an access map, and sendmail takes care of rejecting

RE: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Damrose, Mark
-Original Message- From: Jeff Rife On 28 Apr 2006 at 9:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Export the list of valid email addresses from your destination MTA periodically, build an access map, and sendmail takes care of rejecting invalid recipients before MIMEDefang is called.

RE: [Mimedefang] filter_recipient questions

2006-04-28 Thread Jeff Rife
On 28 Apr 2006 at 12:34, Damrose, Mark wrote: Actually, no it doesn't. Sendmail doesn't do any more checking to see if the address is valid. That's true - unless you explicitly list every valid address in an access map, and reject everything else. Which is exactly what was

[Mimedefang] Re: filter_recipient questions (Jan Pieter Cornet David Skoll)

2006-04-28 Thread Dirk the Daring
Thanks to David and Jan for replying: On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- 1) Is filter_recipient called for each RCPT TO: (as would appear to be the case), or at DATA? At RCPT To: And David noted the same thing. That was my

Re: [Mimedefang] Re: filter_recipient questions (Jan Pieter Cornet David Skoll)

2006-04-28 Thread Kelson
Dirk the Daring wrote: That won't work, just return('REJECT', Recipient invalid); I was hoping I could do that. Much simpler (altho it'll also involve being nice enuf to the SPAMmers to give them a 5xx, and I really don't like being nice to them. Think of it this way: You're not doing it