On Wednesday, October 27, 2004, 12:08:07 PM, Andrew wrote: <snip/>
CA> As for me, I prefer to use Declude & Sniffer. A weighted system rocks. CA> Andrew 8) CA> p.s. Now, if SpamAssassin has a way to shell out to call Sniffer ... hmmmmm SA 2.x had a patch to call Sniffer. We haven't seen one for SA 3.x yet and it looks like a real performance buster so I'm not pressing for it. However, you can use a modified version of the current postfix script to pipe sniffer in front of spamc ala "sniffer | spamc ..." and soon (2-3.1i1) sniffer will be upgraded to run directly in a pipe (no script). This has the advantage that the full analysis from sniffer can be used in SA to establish weighted tests - and it will add less than 100ms to SA's potential ~10sec processing time... Another thought - though not fleshed out - is to have sniffer act as a gateway to the program after it... That might be SA, or sendmail (postfix)... This opens up the option to have sniffer "hold" spam, or skip SA, or call some other application depending upon what it sees... All of this is in the works for the next round of development along with more that I can't tell you about ;-). _M This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and (un)subscription instructions go to http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html
