On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Noel Jones <njo...@megan.vbhcs.org> wrote: > On 5/18/2011 1:30 PM, Lima Union wrote: >> >> One last question regarding this, due that the amount of spam is huge >> I'd like to catch some of these messages, how should I configure >> Postfix in order to let this kind of messages (beginning with /^0-/ ) >> bypass all my checks (RBL,etc) and redirect them to my account to >> review them? is this possible? >> Thanks once again. > > You can do that, but you'll need to adjust your rules some. The general idea > is you need to REDIRECT the mail and then whitelist it before subsequent > rules reject it. We'll use a restriction class because postfix can't > normally do two actions on one match. Something like: > > !Caution! > http://www.postfix.org/SMTPD_ACCESS_README.html#danger > > > # main.cf > smtpd_restriction_classes = > REDIRECT_OK > > REDIRECT_OK = > check_sender_access > regexp:$config_directory/maps/redirect.regexp > permit > > # redirect.regexp > /./ REDIRECT u...@example.com > > > And in your sender.regexp, change the REJECT line to REDIRECT_OK > # sender.regexp > /^0-/ REDIRECT_OK > > > And then you'll need to change your smtpd_recipient_restrictions to catch > these before any other rules reject them. Something like: > smtpd_recipient_restrictions = > permit_mynetworks, > # reject_unauth_destination should be your first "reject" > reject_unauth_destination, > # move your sender.regexp here, before any other reject* > check_sender_access > regexp:$config_directory/maps/smtpd_sender_checks.regexp, > # other stuff... > reject_invalid_helo_hostname, > reject_non_fqdn_helo_hostname, > reject_non_fqdn_sender, > reject_non_fqdn_recipient, > check_client_access hash:$config_directory/maps/smtpd_client_checks, > check_helo_access hash:$config_directory/maps/smtpd_helo_checks, > check_sender_access hash:$config_directory/maps/smtpd_sender_checks, > check_sender_access > regexp:$config_directory/maps/smtpd_sender_checks.regexp, > ... other exiting stuff... > > >
Noel, thank you very much for your explanation, I'll review and try it tomorrow. LU.
