On 2010-03-05 10:14, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 15:41 -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 2010-03-04 15:13, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
[snip]
How is SA called?
(Lines manually "continued" for easy reading.)
# grep spam /etc/postfix/master.cf
smtp inet n - n - - \
smtpd -o content_filter=spamfilter:
spamfilter unix - n n - - pipe flags=Rq user=spamfilter \
argv=/usr/local/bin/spamfilter.sh \
-f ${sender} -- ${recipient}
Are you using per-user configuration?
I think so. But that "user=spamfilter" makes me now think
otherwise.
Hardly a postfix expert here, but I believe you are doing your spam
filtering as the user spamfilter. Site-wide configuration, not per-user.
The $HOME used is the one of spamfilter.
Hmmm.
Someone correct me, if I'm wrong. :)
>
I set this up years ago, and only now care about whitelisting.
I'd suggest to do it right from the beginning. That is, exclusively use
the constraint rcvd or auth whitelisting variants. Also, is there any
valid reason you need this to be per-user? As opposed to maintain a
clean whitelisting site-wide anyway.
My wife and I don't need to white-list the same people.
Also, as I previously hinted -- a *need* for whitelisting often is
caused by some mis-configuration or training. Whitelisting is very
rarely necessary. Do you really need it?
I have noticed lately (maybe after the 3.3.0 upgrade) that the
bayesian filter quite often thinks that ham is really 50%
probability spam, sometimes even 100% spam. SA then adds a big
section to the email saying why it thinks the message is spam.
Does sa-learn know to skip over such stuff?
--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given
us arms." Mike Ditka
