Spamassassin and Sendmail
in [UK Linux]
|
Prev: Being a small-scale ISP
Next: Looking for Wi-Fi
From: Graham Murray on 23 Dec 2008 03:33 "Dave {Reply Address in.Sig}" <"noone$$"@llondel.org> writes: > I've had spamassassin (in its spamd form) and sendmail running happily > for a while now, courtesy of the spamass-milter. However, I notice > that it appears to do spam filtering before address validation, so it I do not think that is possible. SpamAssassin needs the complete message to check for spam, which means that it needs to be run during (or after if not using a milter) the SMTP DATA phase. Sendmail performs address validation prior to the DATA phase, so by the time Spamassassin is invoked, the addresses should already have been evaluated.
From: Gordon Henderson on 23 Dec 2008 04:58 In article <87r63zmgti.fsf(a)newton.gmurray.org.uk>, Graham Murray <newspost(a)gmurray.org.uk> wrote: >"Dave {Reply Address in.Sig}" <"noone$$"@llondel.org> writes: > >> I've had spamassassin (in its spamd form) and sendmail running happily >> for a while now, courtesy of the spamass-milter. However, I notice >> that it appears to do spam filtering before address validation, so it > >I do not think that is possible. SpamAssassin needs the complete message >to check for spam, which means that it needs to be run during (or after >if not using a milter) the SMTP DATA phase. Sendmail performs address >validation prior to the DATA phase, so by the time Spamassassin is >invoked, the addresses should already have been evaluated. That's the behaviour I see when running SA under mimeDefang & sendmail. ie. email to invalid addresses gets rejected. Gordon
From: Andrzej Adam Filip on 23 Dec 2008 10:14 Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet(a)drogon.net> wrote: > In article <87r63zmgti.fsf(a)newton.gmurray.org.uk>, > Graham Murray <newspost(a)gmurray.org.uk> wrote: >>"Dave {Reply Address in.Sig}" <"noone$$"@llondel.org> writes: >> >>> I've had spamassassin (in its spamd form) and sendmail running happily >>> for a while now, courtesy of the spamass-milter. However, I notice >>> that it appears to do spam filtering before address validation, so it >> >>I do not think that is possible. SpamAssassin needs the complete message >>to check for spam, which means that it needs to be run during (or after >>if not using a milter) the SMTP DATA phase. Sendmail performs address >>validation prior to the DATA phase, so by the time Spamassassin is >>invoked, the addresses should already have been evaluated. > > That's the behaviour I see when running SA under mimeDefang & > sendmail. ie. email to invalid addresses gets rejected. Maybe he asks how to reject "invalid" recipients of incoming messages on email gateway between the Internet and internal email system. -- [pl>en Andrew] Andrzej Adam Filip : anfi(a)onet.eu : anfi(a)xl.wp.pl Klingon function calls do not have 'parameters' -- they have 'arguments' -- and they ALWAYS WIN THEM.
From: Will Kemp on 23 Dec 2008 12:21 Dave {Reply Address in.Sig} wrote: > Graham Murray wrote: >> "Dave {Reply Address in.Sig}" <"noone$$"@llondel.org> writes: >> >>> I've had spamassassin (in its spamd form) and sendmail running happily >>> for a while now, courtesy of the spamass-milter. However, I notice >>> that it appears to do spam filtering before address validation, so it >> I do not think that is possible. SpamAssassin needs the complete message >> to check for spam, which means that it needs to be run during (or after >> if not using a milter) the SMTP DATA phase. Sendmail performs address >> validation prior to the DATA phase, so by the time Spamassassin is >> invoked, the addresses should already have been evaluated. > > Based on the setup here, where I'm dumping all the spam into a single > place, much of it is addressed to invalid recipients, including some old > message-IDs. Some is addressed to mail aliases as well. Therefore I > assume that it's all being offered to spamassassin without address > validation or expansion. You are looking at the *envelope* "To", aren't you? Not the *header* "To:" -- http://NovemberEchoRomeoDelta.com
From: Martin Gregorie on 24 Dec 2008 06:58
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:32:35 -0800, Dave {Reply Address in.Sig} wrote: > I've had spamassassin (in its spamd form) and sendmail running happily > for a while now, courtesy of the spamass-milter. However, I notice that > it appears to do spam filtering before address validation, so it is > processing a lot more spam than it really needs to, whereas my previous > installation (not using spamassassin or sendmail) only bothered to > spam-check stuff that was destined for successful delivery. > > Is it possible to set things up so that sendmail does address > validation/expansion before passing mail on for spam checking? My > Google-fu has failed to turn up anything useful. Is changing to Postfix a possibility? That's capable of applying sender and RBL filtering before the message gets passed to SA. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org | |