St?phane Cottin writes:
dspam already send errors to syslog, the point here is to never loose email contents. This was a wrong design, i'm now use a wrapper instead ( see my previous post for details ).
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
If you really don't want the recipient to lose Email, you should buffer the input into a file, run dspam on it, and if the output is not-null, pipe it to dovecot-lda, otherwise pipe the original input.
Joseph Tam jtam.home@gmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 25 Jan 2015, Joseph Tam wrote:
St?phane Cottin writes:
dspam already send errors to syslog, the point here is to never loose email contents. This was a wrong design, i'm now use a wrapper instead ( see my previous post for details ).
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
which would be OK, if "never loose email contents" means "no message is discarded silently".
If you really don't want the recipient to lose Email, you should buffer the input into a file, run dspam on it, and if the output is not-null, pipe it to dovecot-lda, otherwise pipe the original input.
(Y)
Steffen Kaiser -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1
iQEVAwUBVMXyLnz1H7kL/d9rAQJMfgf8ChF+8YSwDbGHribJO7fyOkrXVL81aiMG PXQr3NYEpz4WF1sQT+4lWeTfh+5FJ2HuNXLd2erN8KY3rdcwnxPrYdiZDia02JUx tA3QTMlmgOmPGc9rFqqob5TxuCzgYd+98dn4EokkNBUOK6J60J9uHmNKGkaZRXEd KD49FEJ8MYx7O+NryspJkr7jZELxp8L0wrLHUSZ/QQkqJRj6CqLKDP+InpdcIKqI Sp6sUF6BngFSS3x9+1xygjDOFWfc7KgmNu4gs+hsdPio+skY16QX8jhcKVCsYn/m 2Jv2wNB9vREe+2uDDc345Ssi5wnorhnn+fCrVKx7cDgziCRADDjPQA== =RGxT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Am 26.01.2015 um 08:52 schrieb Steffen Kaiser:
On Sun, 25 Jan 2015, Joseph Tam wrote:
St?phane Cottin writes:
dspam already send errors to syslog, the point here is to never loose email contents. This was a wrong design, i'm now use a wrapper instead ( see my previous post for details ).
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
which would be OK, if "never loose email contents" means "no message is discarded silently".
no, it is not OK to backscatter because the spamfilter fails
realize that 99% auf junk is using forged senders
recently i got each day some hundret such bounces from mailservers configured by fools reply to spam with forged senders and if i could i would have gone out for beat every responsible admin straight in the face
Le 26 janv. 2015 à 10:09, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net a écrit :
Am 26.01.2015 um 08:52 schrieb Steffen Kaiser:
On Sun, 25 Jan 2015, Joseph Tam wrote:
St?phane Cottin writes:
dspam already send errors to syslog, the point here is to never loose email contents. This was a wrong design, i'm now use a wrapper instead ( see my previous post for details ).
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
which would be OK, if "never loose email contents" means "no message is discarded silently".
no, it is not OK to backscatter because the spamfilter fails
realize that 99% auf junk is using forged senders
recently i got each day some hundret such bounces from mailservers configured by fools reply to spam with forged senders and if i could i would have gone out for beat every responsible admin straight in the face
I may discard emails based on RBLs, but I don't want to discard emails based on statistical fllters, I prefer deliver them in the Junk folder and let the user have a chance to reclassify using dovecot_antispam. And yes, bounce spams to (forged or not) sender is useless.
Am 26.01.2015 um 10:52 schrieb Stéphane Cottin:
Le 26 janv. 2015 à 10:09, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net a écrit :
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
which would be OK, if "never loose email contents" means "no message is discarded silently".
no, it is not OK to backscatter because the spamfilter fails
realize that 99% auf junk is using forged senders
recently i got each day some hundret such bounces from mailservers configured by fools reply to spam with forged senders and if i could i would have gone out for beat every responsible admin straight in the face
I may discard emails based on RBLs, but I don't want to discard emails based on statistical fllters, I prefer deliver them in the Junk folder and let the user have a chance to reclassify using dovecot_antispam. And yes, bounce spams to (forged or not) sender is useless
you *must not* discard mails - in no context - period
that's why milters exist to tag between let say 5.0 and 8.0 spam points and REJECT pre-queue based on SpamAssassin and/or ClamAV
maybe dspam can't do that, but it's *abandonware* anyways http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.dspam.user/19136
Le 26 janv. 2015 à 11:21, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net a écrit :
Am 26.01.2015 um 10:52 schrieb Stéphane Cottin:
Le 26 janv. 2015 à 10:09, Reindl Harald h.reindl@thelounge.net a écrit :
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
which would be OK, if "never loose email contents" means "no message is discarded silently".
no, it is not OK to backscatter because the spamfilter fails
realize that 99% auf junk is using forged senders
recently i got each day some hundret such bounces from mailservers configured by fools reply to spam with forged senders and if i could i would have gone out for beat every responsible admin straight in the face
I may discard emails based on RBLs, but I don't want to discard emails based on statistical fllters, I prefer deliver them in the Junk folder and let the user have a chance to reclassify using dovecot_antispam. And yes, bounce spams to (forged or not) sender is useless
you *must not* discard mails - in no context - period
right, s/discard/reject/
that's why milters exist to tag between let say 5.0 and 8.0 spam points and REJECT pre-queue based on SpamAssassin and/or ClamAV
maybe dspam can't do that, but it's *abandonware* anyways http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.dspam.user/19136
dspam is fast and lightweight, ideal for low memory virtual servers, and AFAIK the only spamassasin alternative.
Le 26 janv. 2015 à 05:31, Joseph Tam jtam.home@gmail.com a écrit :
St?phane Cottin writes:
dspam already send errors to syslog, the point here is to never loose email contents. This was a wrong design, i'm now use a wrapper instead ( see my previous post for details ).
You're stilling going to lose contents. If dspam fails, the mail is dumped, the LDA returns exit code 75, and the MTA will probably issue a bounce Email to the sender.
from dovecot-lda man page :
75 A temporary failure. This is returned for almost all failures. See the log file for details. (EX_TEMPFAIL)
The mta keep the mail and retry delivery later, which is what I need.
If you really don't want the recipient to lose Email, you should buffer the input into a file, run dspam on it, and if the output is not-null, pipe it to dovecot-lda, otherwise pipe the original input.
I don't want to deliver email on dspam error, I prefer TEMPFAIL and future retries, so I have a chance to fix the issue later without loosing or deliver unprocessed mails
Joseph Tam jtam.home@gmail.com
participants (4)
-
Joseph Tam
-
Reindl Harald
-
Steffen Kaiser
-
Stéphane Cottin