On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
On Thu, Dec 14, 2006 at 12:11:11PM -0500, Dan Mahoney, System Admin wrote:
At the moment, that's a hack in the system-wide procmailrc that I don't
know how to do, since the only thing procmail knows about userspace is
"dropprivs="yes"", and there's no translation for an easy way to equate
that to email address (i.e. it allows me to do it per *domain* not per
user, i.e. [EMAIL PROTECTED], but if a user has two domains, then I'd have to
do them each separately).
If you're using procmail, you could look at the X-Original-To (or similar)
header to figure out who the mail is going to. Otherwise, you could modify
your setup to pass information in to procmail from the MTA.
Presuming we're looking for the value of the "user" based on the email
address, yes, I understand, but can't you check the value of -u before you
even do that? (i.e. at the earliest point)
Ah, there you're talking about spamc/spamd which is a different beasty all
together. If you want to skip checks based on how you're calling spamc, then
check the value you're going to use for the username and don't call spamc if
you don't want the mail scanned.
I'm running procmail with dropprivs=yes. There's no easy procmail thing
for (getpwnam($<)) and I do NOT feel like firing up perl on every message
to evaluate that just to figure out if I should fire up the C program that
I use so I don't have to fire up perl.
I see procmail macros for the email address, and for the _TO thing, but
NOTHING that just gives you the goddamned login.
I don't need -u on spamc, spamc just picks up that username and runs with
it. If I'm running spamc as danm, spamd grabs danm's prefs.
When I said -u, I was asking how spamd would recognize the implied value
of -u, not the actual command line flag.
If that makes sense?
-Dan
--
"It would be bad."
-Egon Spengler, "Ghostbusters"
--------Dan Mahoney--------
Techie, Sysadmin, WebGeek
Gushi on efnet/undernet IRC
ICQ: 13735144 AIM: LarpGM
Site: http://www.gushi.org
---------------------------
