"Hartmut Wernisch | Domaintechnik.at" <h...@domaintechnik.at> wrote on 13.12.2011 16:20:24:
> On 13 Dec 11, Hartmut Wernisch | Domaintechnik.at wrote: > > On 13 Dec 11, Eduard Svarc wrote: > > > Ah, thats bad. I do use spamassasin as well. These messages are marked as > > > junk. I would like to stop accepting these messages completely. These > > > messages are spam with 100% probability and can be safely discraded on > > > input. At first look I did think that Spamdyke blacklist rule @domain > > > don't work, but then I found it only doesn't apply on these > reply-to: same > > > ways as for addresses from:. I hope new version of Spamdyke can include > > > reply-to: into check as well. > > > > > > In my opinion this is an interesting idea worth thinking of! > > Should be more or less copy and paste of the sender check part > > of spamdyke. > > Probably this is wrong, because the info is not available at smtp time. > So I don't now the source code if it is suitable for reuse :) > > Best > Hartmut reading this, make me rething idea. Spamdyke does only intial check from: and to: probably not going thru all headers because these are in SMPT protocol part of DATA. It is not possible to achieve blocking other headers with spamdyke. If I want this functionality then SMTP daemon must do it in my case only QMAIL can check this header and drop connection. FYI at least I know my Spamdyke isn't broken. Eduard
_______________________________________________ spamdyke-users mailing list spamdyke-users@spamdyke.org http://www.spamdyke.org/mailman/listinfo/spamdyke-users
