>>> On 8/23/2016 at 1:16 AM, in message <388d98f9-e63e-4d0a-865a-f32814510...@billmail.scconsult.com>, "Bill Cole" <postfixlists-070...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote: > On 22 Aug 2016, at 16:14, Joe Acquisto-j4 wrote: > >> Any chance of assistance here with alterMIME? > > A slim chance, but it's worth a shot... > >> There is a need to add disclaimers to outgoing mail. > > Someone won't listen to reason, huh? That's unfortunate.
Yes. Sad how common that is these days. > You might try pointing them at > http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/technology/articles/winter > 2013-0213-do-email-disclaimers-really-work.html > but only you can judge whether pushing back is a better or worse > strategy in your circumstance than just doing a small bit of useless > work. "You can lead a horse to water . . . " >> I have it configured (one supposes) to be complaint free on restart of >> postfix and can see from /var/log/mail that is does act on the >> specific email addresses (senders) that I intended. At least it was >> processed by "filter". I am a bit puzzled that "relay" shows as >> "filter" for all users. But mail does ultimately deliver via the >> normal route > > Evidence of what exactly this all means would help make it easier to > help. I'd bet that most people here don't use alterMIME, but that's not > entirely dooming: many of us use tools that modify mail as it passes > through Postfix and generally speaking that works in a limited number of > ways. The fact that you're trying to use alterMIME specifically is not > as important as how you have configured Postfix to use it, what your log > is actually saying about the handling of messages, and what the raw > input and output messages look like. > >> However, the received mail does not actually contain the disclaimer >> message. Google has not been my friend today with no results that >> seem to apply. > > Based on these being the top "how to" hits for altermime disclaimers: > > https://www.howtoforge.com/how-to-automatically-add-a-disclaimer-to-outgoing-emails-w > > ith-altermime-postfix-on-debian-squeeze > https://www.gypthecat.com/how-to-add-different-disclaimers-using-altermime-and-postf > > ix-based-on-domain Those were my "templates". I had to dig a bit deeper to get this far. > I'm guessing that you're using a similar setup: a script run as a pipe > transport due to a content_filter directive in the smtpd line in > master.cf, which runs altermime on messages selectively and reinjects > them with sendmail. That's a bit inflexible and inefficient, but I guess > it would be OK for very modest volume and not needing the disclaimer on > mail generated on the server itself. That approach pipes *all* mail > arriving by SMTP into the filter script, avoiding loops because local > 'sendmail' submission doesn't use SMTP. This would explain why your log > shows all mail going to "filter". > Assuming that guess is correct... It is. >I'd start by making sure that the > script that runs altermime is run by a user that can write to wherever > it tries to do its work. Once you confirm this isn't a permissions > problem (which I expect because that would likely cause no delivery at > all,) add diagnostic lines to the script so you can see what exactly it > is actually doing when it runs. > > And for what it's worth: if you really must do this, consider using a > better tool. One option: the MIMEDefang milter. MIMEDefang is maybe > overkill if this is just an outbound system and you don't need robust > filtering capabilities, but it is a mature, actively maintained, and > well-documented piece of software that can manipulate MIME messages > correctly, including adding silly disclaimers selectively without > damaging message structure. As a milter, it acts on a message as it > passes through a Postfix smtpd process rather than as a next hop > transport and Postfix can be configured to also use it for non-SMTP > injections. That may be best. I was put off by alterMIME, last touched in 2008 or so, but there was precious little else I could find. Overkill is OK as long as it stays dead. I was concerned about "volume" as there are occasional "blasts" of messages that forced me to tinker so mail flowed through faster. >There may be other milters available strictly for adding > disclaimers, but I'm not aware of any. I sure did not find any. Thanks for your thorough response. The MIMEDefang suggestion I will definitely follow up on. Well, off to the sulphur mines.
