Re: [SAtalk] Postfix unknown user (peripherally related)

Hi, On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:40:22 -0800 "Gary Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Greg Webster > Sent: Tue 12/30/2003 11:31 AM > > Not 100% a spamassassin issue, but I've got a ton of spammers trying any >

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix unknown user (peripherally related)

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 11:31:29 -0800 Greg Webster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey folks, > > Not 100% a spamassassin issue, but I've got a ton of spammers trying any > address they possibly can on my domain. Postfix responds to each one > with a 'reject: unknown user', but of course spammers don't

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix unknown user (peripherally related)

Not 100% a spamassassin issue, but I've got a ton of spammers trying any address they possibly can on my domain. Postfix responds to each one with a 'reject: unknown user', but of course spammers don't use their own address and my mail queue gets insanely full (not quite to the point of a denial-

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix unknown user (peripherally related)

Create a user called "blackhole" and then add the entry into the postfix configuration (/etc/postfix/virtual) that says (usually the last line) @yourdomain.com[EMAIL PROTECTED] This basically says any lost mail goes to the blackhole user. Then create a cron job similar to this: :>/

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

Hi Brian, On the SpamAssassin.org site in the Documentation section is a HOWTO I wrote to do this a couple different ways. Greg Good Morning, All, I'm just getting my feet wet (still wet behind the ears, though) with SpamAssassin and I am looking for specific info for setting it up to run with

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

I've also found the following reference to be quite helpful. I didn't want to parse outgoing mail, and this one is explicitely telling you how: http://jessen.ch/articles/spamassassin-and-postfix/ On Tuesday December 30 2003 10:08, Atkins, Brian wrote: > Good Morning, All, > > I'm just getting my

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

If you want to use postfix/amavisd-new/SA, I can recommend these docs: http://www.geocities.com/scottlhenderson/spamfilter.html and http://lawmonkey.org/anti-spam.html Casper. --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

Looks like the site's down right now but if you want to do it for all email this is about as easy as it gets - http://postfix.cnc.bc.ca/twiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome I use a combination of that, and the stuff at http://www.advosys.ca/papers/printable/postfix-filtering.html on a box in my DMZ to ha

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

sorry, forgot the url http://advosys.ca/papers/postfix-filtering.html > -Original Message- > From: Atkins, Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 10:08 AM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin > > > Good Morning, All, > > I'm j

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and Spamassasin

Brian, I used this site for about 95% of my setup. I used postfix in front of an Exchange server. HTH Mike Schrauder www.specialtyblades.com www.olfablades.com > -Original Message- > From: Atkins, Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 10:08 AM > To:

Re: [SAtalk] postfix

On Mon, Dec 29, 2003 at 02:11:39PM -0500, gentian wrote: > Hi list, > > I am thinking to use Postfix together with SpamAssassin and Amavisd. I guess > maybe that is not the right list to ask this question but probably any of you > has encountered this issue before. > > With postconf -e "mynetwo

Re: [SAtalk] postfix

* gentian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > With > postconf -e "mynetworks=." > i can setup which machines are allowed to relay mail to my server, > but as I am opened to internet, I do not want to allow relaying based > on the IP address of the sender but based on my domain name. So every > email tha

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix - procmail - spamassassin config

Daniel Kaliel wrote: Hey At least once a week our server hangs. I can't figure this out. It seems to be hanging when spamassassin is working on large emails. Here is how I have it setup and where I am confused. My confusion lies in this. If I use the mailbox_command field in postfix do I need

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix Spamtrap Configuration

Mark Hepler wrote: [...] does anyone know of a website that has an example of setting up a spamtrap like this with postfix ? I don't know about postfix, but since you mention courier I'd suggest a slightly different approach. If your users use IMAP it might be easier to have them copy their mail

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

> -Original Message- > From: Alex van den Bogaerdt > On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:42:15AM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > > > in master.cf: > > > > > > spamc unix- n n - - > pipe > > > flags=Fq > > > user=spamcheck

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 12:42:15AM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote: > Hi Alex, > > in master.cf: > > > > spamc unix- n n - - pipe > > flags=Fq > > user=spamcheck > > argv=/usr/bin/spamc -x -e /usr/sbin/sendmail -i -f > > $sender $reci

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

Hi Alex, > -Original Message- > From: Alex van den Bogaerdt > I once tried to find out what the big need was to do it either way. > > May I present a third (or is it: a second?) alternative: > > in master.cf: > > spamc unix- n n - - pipe >

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

Thanks to all who answered! Your perspectives are greatly appreciated! Regards, Larry --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf ___ Spamassassin

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 04:02:11PM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote: > I have been trying to understand the advantages and disadvantages of using > the shell script method (like that employed by SecuritySage) and the > Procmail method as a content_filter for Postfix. Can someone lend an expert > opinion

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 04:02:11PM -0400, Larry Gilson wrote: > I have been trying to understand the advantages and disadvantages of using > the shell script method (like that employed by SecuritySage) and the > Procmail method as a content_filter for Postfix. Can someone lend an expert > opinion?

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 16:02:11 -0400 Larry Gilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have been trying to understand the advantages and disadvantages of > using the shell script method (like that employed by SecuritySage) and > the Procmail method as a content_filter for Postfix. Can someone lend > a

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and spamc - call by shell or Procmail

I use a homemade filter chain based on the Perl Mail::Audit package. The advantage is, if you know Perl, it's much easier to set up and maintain than Procmail. The disadvantage is, if you don't know Perl you probably can't use it. Oh yeah, and running it means you have to deal with whatever overh

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix 2, amavis-new,f-prot yes, sa 2.55 no??

Nevermind. I found the answers at http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/#faq-spam Thanks anyway. On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:27:02 -0500, Mike Vanecek wrote > I have got amavis debug running. I have postfix setup to only filter > incoming > (using a FILTER command in access_recipients). I have F-Prot >

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix 2 rejects spamassassin-talk-admin

> > Looks like your version of postfix is somehow or another failing to > > understand classless reverse DNS. However, I can't see why it would > > fail to do so since it should all by the OS's resolver library just > > like "host" does. It is not up to Postfix to understand reverse DNS. It is

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix 2 rejects spamassassin-talk-admin

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 13:28:22 -0400, Matt Kettler wrote > At 09:20 AM 8/22/2003 -0500, Mike Vanecek wrote: > >have some rejects in my maillog. Was sourceforge having problems or ??? > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] admin]$ host 66.35.250.206 > >206.250.35.66.in-addr.arpa is an alias for 206.0/24.250.35.66.i

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix 2 rejects spamassassin-talk-admin

At 09:20 AM 8/22/2003 -0500, Mike Vanecek wrote: have some rejects in my maillog. Was sourceforge having problems or ??? [EMAIL PROTECTED] admin]$ host 66.35.250.206 206.250.35.66.in-addr.arpa is an alias for 206.0/24.250.35.66.in-addr.arpa. 206.0/24.250.35.66.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer list

Re: [SAtalk] postfix relay server not tagging email

I don't do postfix or procmail, so I can't really help there, but you definitely should *not* use SpamAssassin 2.44. It's outdated, and you're sure to be disappointed with the results. SpamAssassin is like a virus scanner: it needs to be kept updated to be effective. Mark Brosius wrote: I ha

RE: [SAtalk] postfix relay server not tagging email

Hi Mark, >-Original Message- >From: Mark Brosius >Here is my goal: > >Internet -> SpamAssassin -> Exchange I use a similar setup. >created /usr/bin/postfixfilter (owned by spamfilter >permissions 755) which contains: ACCORDING TO GREG >WEBSTER'S HOW TO > #!/bin/bash > /usr/b

RE: [SAtalk] postfix relay server not tagging email

Thank you for the quick response Larry. I changed my /etc/procmail file to contain only what you suggested. I then tried to send email to my local user and the email did not have the spam header information. I'm guessing that the email is still not being evaluated by spamc/spamd before it is bei

Re: [SAtalk] postfix-2.0.13-20030706

Tony Earnshaw wrote: The new TLS patch for Postfix 2.0.13 doesn't work properly yet, smtpd and smtp have to talk to Amavisd unencrypted and encryption can't be turned off at the moment to talk to Amavisd (bug), so the smtpd servers should not advertise STARTTLS on an EHLO. The above has now bee

Re: [SAtalk] postfix-2.0.13-20030706

Lucas Albers wrote: So now their are three mail combinations that can block spam at the smtp 5xx rejection stage. SA-Mimedefang-Sendmail Postfix-2.xxx-CVS+AMavis SA-Exim Don't forget Tom Kistner's Exiscan for Exim 4, either. That can do virus scanning too, like Amavisd-new (needs extra virus scan

Re: [SAtalk] postfix-2.0.13-20030706

> What's new about it, is that Postfix/amavisd-new - with this snapshot - > can now do realtime smtp 5xx rejection of spam/virus (or save them to a > quarantine directory, as before.) That lifts Postfix into SA-Exim 4's > class as far as I'm concerned and I'm happy to be able to support it :-) > >

Re: [SAtalk] postfix-2.0.13-20030706

At 7/8/2003 06:23 PM +0200, Tony Earnshaw wrote: >The snapshot doesn't depend on Amavis for this. Any similar product with Amavis' >properties could be used as proxy. But the normal Postfix/SA filter routine wouldn't >have the same possibilities as Amavis. I can't comment on spampd (that's spamp

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix error: Client host rejected: cannot find your hostname.

> He has his own Consulting house, and occasionally send his lesser > minions - Maurice, Xena and Yoda - to help, if he's busy. Consulting? To the dark side it leads. Easy! Tempting! -- Ralf Hildebrandt (Im Auftrag des Referat V a) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Charite Campus Mitte

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix error: Client host rejected: cannot find yourhostname.

Tony Earnshaw wrote: Oleg Aronov wrote: I have a problem ... I have discussed this with Billy, my most intelligent cat and my IT consultant (compare him to a mixture of Garfield and Catbert) I have one of those - his name is Scudder. Not only is he a great consultant, but he frequently grabs t

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix error: Client host rejected: cannot find yourhostname.

Tony Earnshaw wrote: I have a problem and hope that somebody could help me. We are running Postfix everything is fine except that some clients of ours cannot sent emails to us. I have discussed this with Billy, my most intelligent cat and my IT consultant (compare him to a mixture of Garfield

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix error: Client host rejected: cannot find yourhostname.

Oleg Aronov wrote: I have a problem and hope that somebody could help me. We are running Postfix everything is fine except that some clients of ours cannot sent emails to us. I have discussed this with Billy, my most intelligent cat and my IT consultant (compare him to a mixture of Garfield and

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix - Don't Scan Outbound

This is actually a common question about Postfix. The answer is no, you can't do anything within Postfix itself to make an inbound/outbound distinction. The best answer is apparently to run a separate postfix server on the same box. The document on www.spamassassin.org about making Postfix work

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix - Don't Scan Outbound

On Fri, 2003-01-31 at 13:12, Ray Dzek wrote: > I want to take the functionallity of the 3 boxes I have now (Inbound Postfix > +SA, Sendmail Outbound Relay, and Postfix + POP3) and cut that all down to > one box. The transport mappings and aliases required to get the Mac users > onto the POP3 box

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix - Procmail - SA _Security Problem?

Christoph Bieselt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) had this to say on 11/18/02 at 05:47: > Hi together, > > I am using Postfix with Procmail to call SA. As usual the procmail is > called with the user defined in /etc/postfix/master.cf where the > procmail transport is specified. SA is called by the user cyrus

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix. How do I do quick set-up for SA? (NEWBIE)

> "AS" == Apolinaras Sinkevicius writes: AS> I am trying to figure out what would be the least time consuming and AS> easiest way to integrate SA into postfix. Any ideas? The most robust method IMHO, is to use amavisd-new: http://www.ijs.si/software/amavisd/ Full instructions are provided

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix. How do I do quick set-up for SA? (NEWBIE)

On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Apolinaras 'Apollo' Sinkevicius (Carmel Music & Entertainment, LLC) wrote: > I am trying to figure out what would be the least time consuming and > easiest way to integrate SA into postfix. Any ideas? Follow the instructions to run spamd and to call spamc via the /etc/prom

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix. How do I do quick set-up for SA? (NEWBIE)

Yeah, it's pretty easy. I strongly suggest running SA with SPAMD and SPAMC. SPAMD will always run, and when postfix receives an email it will spawn a filter script which in turn execs SPAMC process which is written in compiled C and very lean/small footprint. Otherwise, it will be spawning a new P

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and high load

> "FA" == Florin Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: FA> Do you happen to have any hints on stripping down functionality on FA> amavisd to use _only_ SpamAssassin and no antivir stuff? I'm searching FA> strictly for a method to interface Postfix and SpamAssassin that works FA> well under high

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and high load

* Florin Andrei ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote this on 09 26, 02 at 23:43: > On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 06:42, Vivek Khera wrote: > > > "FA" == Florin Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > FA> (i'll describe my situation first, the questions are at the end) > > FA> I managed to make SpamAssassin

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and high load

On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 06:42, Vivek Khera wrote: > > "FA" == Florin Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > FA> (i'll describe my situation first, the questions are at the end) > FA> I managed to make SpamAssassin talk to my Postfix MTA. Brief description > FA> of the method: > FA> 1. Get & ins

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and high load

> "FA" == Florin Andrei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: FA> (i'll describe my situation first, the questions are at the end) FA> I managed to make SpamAssassin talk to my Postfix MTA. Brief description FA> of the method: FA> 1. Get & install SpamAssassin (obvious) FA> 2. Get spampd [ ... ] FA

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and high load

Florin Andrei said: > Has anyone compared spampd and spamproxyd in terms of speed and > reliability under high load? From what I hear, spampd is much better. > What is the best solution for interfacing Postfix and SpamAssassin for > servers under high load? (seems to me like spampd/spamproxyd

Re: [SAtalk] postfix success, and a question

>Now my question. I am interested in having spamassassin use a "plus > address" for things that it flags as spam. Can anyone tell me how I > could have spamassassin change the "to" address say from > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for messages marked as > spam? I think you could d

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix as an MTA with SA -- forwarding spam

> -Original Message- > From: Steve Halligan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 23 September 2002 21:02 > To: Spamassassin-Talk (E-mail) > Subject: [SAtalk] Postfix as an MTA with SA -- forwarding spam > > > I am running Postfix as a gateway MTA (no local delivery) and > am using SA to

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix + Procmail + Spam Assassin + Cyrus

Fresh DailyT - Original Message - From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "David B. Bitton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2002 11:34 PM Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Postfix + Procmail + Spam Assassin + Cyrus > > what do you mean by 'u

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix + Procmail + Spam Assassin + Cyrus

get rid of the procmail link, plug in spamcheck.py as the lmtp connection for postfix, and have spamcheck.py then dump to cyrus' lmtp server for filtering (sieve) and delivery ... On Sat, 15 Jun 2002, David B. Bitton wrote: > Looks like I found the problem w/ Cyrus reporting invalid header. I

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix spamproxyd

Ok, well I figured out the problem, the CHANGES.spamproxy says it requires *3* parameters, when the code was looking for just 2. Here's a patch that fixes this: --- spamproxyd.raw.old Sat Apr 6 12:47:14 2002 +++ spamproxyd.raw Thu May 30 17:35:08 2002 @@ -61,14 +61,10 @@ "minpe

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

On 23/05/02 at 17:56, John Weissberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote : > Can anyone point me to a clear and simply explanation of how > to set-up SA with Postfix using either spamd or spamproxy? > > I tried 4 or 5 months ago back when bleeding edge was V2.0 and > was unsuccessful then. Perhaps someone

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

John, I am setting up the same thing at the moment actually. I haven't fully released it to our customer base, but I am testing it and it is working fine. Any comments from others would be great though. I've installed Procmail v3.22 and SpamAssassin 2.20. I am running spamd with the flags -d (da

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

> "JW" == John Weissberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: JW> Can anyone point me to a clear and simply explanation of how to set-up JW> SA with Postfix using either spamd or spamproxy? spamproxyd can lose your mail, so don't use it. what I'm using is amavisd-new without any antivirus checker. b

Re: Blind-copy (Re: [SAtalk] Postfix snapshot 1.1.8-20020505 available)

On Sat, 11 May 2002, Daniel Pittman wrote: > On Fri, 10 May 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote: > > On Fri, 10 May 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote: > > [...] > > >> using the Bcc field instead of To or CC then you'll want to manually > >> adjust the score the GA assigns. But you might also want to > >> re-eval

Re: Blind-copy (Re: [SAtalk] Postfix snapshot 1.1.8-20020505available)

On Fri, 10 May 2002, Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Fri, 10 May 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote: [...] >> using the Bcc field instead of To or CC then you'll want to manually >> adjust the score the GA assigns. But you might also want to >> re-evaluate your email practices -- do you *really* need those >>

Blind-copy (Re: [SAtalk] Postfix snapshot 1.1.8-20020505 available)

On Fri, 10 May 2002, Craig R Hughes wrote: > If you are a person who regularly sends all your correspondence That would be "... regularly *receives* ...", wouldn't it? Which is not something over which I necessarily have all that much control ... if I did, I wouldn't need SA :-). > using the B

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix snapshot 1.1.8-20020505 available

Bart Schaefer wrote: BS> What, so now all Bcc's are spam? Nope, just a sign of spam. That's the beauty of weighted scoring. BS> I don't think the GA can possibly give a valid score to such a rule. How BS> can you have any confidence that there's a representative number of Bcc'd BS> messages i

RE: [SAtalk] postfix and spam assassin

Yes. Use spamproxy, which is included in the 2.20 distribution. It was designed to work with postfix. - dan -- Dan Kohn Essays announced on -Original Message- From: Onie Camara [mailto:[EMAIL PR

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix +mysql spamproxyd anyone?

On Sat, 2002-03-09 at 10:38, Donald Greer wrote: >Keith, >Look through the archives. Somebody posted an answer to this before. > Basically, what they did, was follow the "simple" configuration > described in the README.filter and in the shell script they used > "spamc". I don't know

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix +mysql spamproxyd anyone?

Keith, Look through the archives. Somebody posted an answer to this before. Basically, what they did, was follow the "simple" configuration described in the README.filter and in the shell script they used "spamc". I don't know that anyone has used spamproxyd, but the trick is that yo

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and SpamAssassin 2.01 - spamproxyd/Mail::Audit problems

MAIL PROTECTED]' Cc: Greg Blakely; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and SpamAssassin 2.01 - spamproxyd/Mail::Audit problems Craig Hughes wrote: > Actually, we dropped Mail::Audit since it doesn&#x

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and SpamAssassin 2.01 - spamproxyd/Mail::Audit problems

Craig Hughes wrote: > Actually, we dropped Mail::Audit since it doesn't work in a variety of > situations, and replaced it with our own version, > Mail::SpamAssassin::NoMailAudit -- change the line to use > that class instead > (and the "use" line at the beginning of the file) and you > should

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix and SpamAssassin 2.01 - spamproxyd/Mail::Audit problems

Up around the top of the script where it says "use this; use that; use the-other;" put in a line that says "use Mail::Audit;" This only creates ONE process, though. The author has given me a copy of a newer script he wrote that spawns children. It's very stable. I've had it running here for ab

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix and SpamAssassin 2.01 -spamproxyd/Mail::Audit problems

on 2/18/02 11:31 AM, Stewart, John at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The author of Mail::Audit, Simon Cozens, commented: >> Sounds like someone's forgot the "use Mail::Audit". Actually, we dropped Mail::Audit since it doesn't work in a variety of situations, and replaced it with our own version, Mail

RE: [SAtalk] postfix w/out procmail

Note that spamproxyd is not nearly as featureful as spamc/spamd -- in particular, it will process *all* messages, including very long ones, which can suck up a lot of CPU and open your mail server to denial of service attacks. If anyone has got a postfix master.cf line for invoking spamc as a fil

RE: [SAtalk] postfix w/out procmail

> -Original Message- > From: Josh Marcus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 08 February 2002 19:27 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] postfix w/out procmail > > > hey, > > I want to run spamassassin on a relatively busy postfix server, where > procmail really isn't an option.

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up and Mail loops

> -Original Message- > From: John Weissberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 21 January 2002 18:02 > To: Tony Hoyle > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up and Mail loops > > > I am using Postfix and now trying to set up SA via spam

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up and Mail loops

I am using Postfix and now trying to set up SA via spamd. I seem to be creating mail-loops with the spamc pipe to sendmail in the spamfilter file called from Postfix master.cf. It seems that mails that spanc scans are being output via sendmail into a queue that will be scanned by spamc again etc.

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

> -Original Message- > From: John Weissberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 17 January 2002 07:35 > To: Tony Hoyle > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up > > > Sorry to be such a newbie but... I have no idea what the > spamfilte

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

> If I simply wanted to call spamc -f as you suggest, how do I do this from > master.cf or main.cf? > > Add to master.cf: > > spamunix- n n - 10 pipeuser=mail > argv=/usr/local/bin/spamfilter ${sender} ${recipient} > > Add to main.cf: > > content_filter =

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

Sorry to be such a newbie but... I have no idea what the spamfilter file should look like. Can you supply a simple one? All I want to do is re-label spam files with the "***SPAM***" message so that my mail users can easily identify and/or delete them. SA does not need, at this point, to segregate

RE: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

> -Original Message- > From: John Weissberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 16 January 2002 15:48 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up > > > I am using Postfix as my MTA. I would love to have incoming > mail filtered > by Spam Assassin. Can some explain how to

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

Take a look at the FILTER_README in the postfix distro. Basicly you set "content_filter" to send to spamproxy (smtp:localhost: and in master.cf add an smtp server at the return port for spamproxy and overide the content_filter rule: inet n - y - - smtpd -o

Re: [SAtalk] Postfix set-up

Quoting John Weissberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > I am using Postfix as my MTA. I would love to have > incoming mail filtered by Spam Assassin. Can some explain > how to modify Postfix master.cf or main.cf so as to > invoke Spam Assassin for each incoming mail. I use Postfix and SA, and I didn't mod