Hi Jason, I have actually removed SA completely from qmail scanner and placed it into a later step of the delivery chain. One of the reasons was the fact that any email address may in deed go to two recipients with different spam preferences. I am aware that I am scanning these messages twice, but I can use stock versions of the software - otherwise I would have to undo changes added by SA, and add them back in according to the other's preferences
BTW: have you ever thought about qmail-scanner exiting with different codes (so qmail could send different 5xx messages at the end of the data phase) for policy and virus trapped mails Wolfgang Hamann >> I'm the author of the Qmail content filter Qmail-Scanner, and currently >> it calls spamc as "spamc -u [EMAIL PROTECTED]" so as to help out the sites >> doing per-user SA configs. >> >> I've assumed that anyone wanting to do this would be using SQL backends >> (so requiring them to refer to local accounts as "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is >> fine) - but apparently I presumed too much! Some are just interested in >> standard old /home/$USER/.spamassassin/ style lookups. Now calling >> "spamc -u [EMAIL PROTECTED]" doesn't work for them as there is no local >> username called "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". >> >> So I could add yet another feature to Qmail-Scanner where it will strip >> back to the username - or SpamAssassin could. >> >> I don't mind either way - it's just that I wonder if this is also an >> issue for other SA-integrated MTAs (milter, postfix), so thought I'd >> post it out for comment? Maybe others can suggest another way of doing >> it? [Let's not dwell on the fact that spamd may have to run as root for >> this mode to work...] >> >> Thanks >> >> -- >> Cheers >> >> Jason Haar >> Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd. >> Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417 >> PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1 >> >>
