[Dovecot] Unoffical Survey - What MTA/Spam filtering do you use?

[Charles Marcus]

Sysadmin wrote:
> Tere.
>> I highly recommend that anyone who wants a very lightweight, *very* 
>> effective, brain-dead simple (installation *and* maintenance)

I should clarify - it is more complex now, with all of the new 
functionality, but it is still very easy to install and configure.

It is also highly recommended to start with the 1.1.2b1 version, 
familiarize yourself with that, then try the latest builds, after 
reading up on the new functionality. The web interface provides most of 
the documentation you'll need to understand the different parts, and the 
mail list is very responsive to questions.

> Well, I haven't tested it yet, but did check the code, it's written in 
> Perl, so surely it's not lightweight,

Nope, no bias here... ;)

As previously answered, just because it is written in perl, doesn't 
automatically mean it isn't lightweight.

 > and in Your case, maybe configuring the smtp do the HELO check, would
 > improve the situation even without this software.

ASSP is intended to act as a PROXY - ie, BEFORE the SMTP server even 
sees the message - hence the name.

I know that Postfix's HELO checks are similar - but in my experience, 
ASSP is much more effective, and I like the fact that I can put it in 
front of my postfix, to further isolate and protect it - and reduce the 
load on it at the same time.

> And Assp is also old - June 26, 2005, can't actually trust that old
> piece of code...

Hah! Well, ignore it if you wish, it is your loss.

The fact is, even the old 1.1.1 version is still *very* effective. And 
not sure what you mean by 'trust'. I 'trust' my experience with assp far 
more than I do the criticisms of someone who admittedly hasn't even 
tried what he is criticizing yet.

-- 

Best regards,

Charles