Am 17.09.2014 um 14:43 schrieb RW: > On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 11:50:43 +0200 > Reindl Harald wrote: > >> what i want to achieve is 4 levels of negative score for >> both - FROM and TO just because it makes sense to handle >> some mailing lists different without whitelist them completly >> and the same for different RCPT, one user is living in asia >> and needs complete different settings >> >> there is also a need to handle "securityfocus" ML different >> to "postfix-users" without completly whitelist them > > A lot of people don't put mailing lists through Spamassassin, most of > them have already been spam filtered, and to get the best results you > have to extend your internal network and maintain it. And in my > experience most list related spam is off-list anyway.
that's a mail gateway delivering to different destination servers
for a bundle of domains - the problem is not list-related spam, the
problem is get a high score for discussions about spam which you
don't want to feed as positive into bayes
don't get me wrong but i spent really a lot of hours to consider
the environment which is nearly perfect and designed around 10
years expierience with the userbase and other solutions
just some wishes for extensions i would like to be able to
do myself and all about scoring "whitelist_from" is not
enough or goes too far
SA is only a very small piece of the complete system
>> finally offer in the existing webinterface (self-written) a drop-down
>> for each listed address/domain as well as define the score for each
>> level in the general settings to adjust
>>
>> as usal the cronjob builds "local.cf" from a template and that
>> settings
>
> If you are going to autogenerate them into local.cf you can generate
> header rules just as easily. The chief advantage of what you are
> asking for would be for users to set in ~/.spamassassin.
running as milter with a milter user and it's global bayes
there is no users setting - just a global system maintained centralized
>> score USER_IN_MOST_SPAM_FROM -4
>> header USER_IN_MOST_SPAM_FROM
>> eval:check_from('USER_IN_MOST_SPAM_FROM')
>>
>> score USER_IN_ALMOST_ALL_SPAM_FROM -6
>> header USER_IN_ALMOST_ALL_SPAM_FROM
>> eval:check_from('USER_IN_ALMOST_ALL_SPAM_FROM')
>
> The terminology seems a bit defeatist. Would you really let through
> almost all spam at a threshold of 11.0?
forget the terminology and the score points
the point what i am asking for is removed in the quote:
* implement several "WL" score levels based on sender
* implement several "WL" score levels based on RCPT
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
