On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 11:15:21AM +0200, Tom Hendrikx wrote: > On 06/05/10 10:58, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote: > > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 01:44:54PM -0400, Brian Evans - Postfix List wrote: > >>>> > >>> You could try this in /etc/postfis/header_checks > >>> > >>> if > >>> /^(Received|X-((Origin(ating)?|Client|MDRemote|Sender)-?IP|(Client|Remote_)Addr|PHP-Script)):/ > >>> if > >>> !/^(X-Original-)?To:[...@]*(africanspamlover1|africanspamlover2|etc..)@/ > >>> /\b(41\.1(6\d|7[0-5])\.\d+\.\d+)\b/ REJECT african spam rule 1 > >>> /\b(41\.3(6\d|7[0-5])\.\d+\.\d+)\b/ REJECT african spam rule 2 > >>> .. and all other rules ... > >>> endif > >>> endif > >>> > >> This will not work. > >> Postfix analyzes headers one at a time. > >> You cannot check multiple headers at once in header_checks. > >> You need a milter or other filter to do that. > > > > Could this be entered as a postfix wishlist item then? A 'm' flag to > > pcre_table that would match on the whole headers (instead of > > line-by-line), akin to Perl's 'm' regexp flag: > > > > m Treat string as multiple lines. That is, change "^" and "$" from > > matching the start or end of the string to matching the start or > > end of any line anywhere within the string. > > > > It would be very powerful, yet retain the ability to match on any > > individual header line with ^ and $ anchors. > > > > Hi, > > I think that postfwd can do all of this already, working as a policy > daemon. See http://www.postfwd.org/ > > No need to complicate postfix any further: it is an MTA, and should > concentrate on mail delivery. There is a reason that you can hook up a > myriad of external tools into postfix.
What is more complicated? Plug yet another policy daemon to one's postfix installation (with all the care and feeding it entails) or add a totally transparent and optional 'm' flag to postfix's pcre_table?
