Interesting games with spam-assassin.
phayze at SecureRoot.org.uk
Sun Sep 7 14:44:17 BST 2003
On Sun, 2003-09-07 at 12:20, Ceri Davies wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2003 at 11:31:09PM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 10:28:25PM +0100, Ceri Davies wrote:
> > > I'd agree with the latter idea too, although my MTA (exim, though I'm sure
> > > others allow it) has enough hooks that I could trivially implement the
> > > 550-incoming-mail-over-12-points check, while allowing users who don't want
> > > it to opt out (or vice versa).
> > >
> > > For the case in point of this list, however, I'd suggest that a bit of
> > > mandatory spam filtering is fair game, if you have the resources to do it.
> > Agreed - or applying severe header checking at the MTA level. Merely
> > installing Postfix with a fair number of smtp recipient restrictions
> > has enabled me to weed out most spoofed mail.
> > Actively identifying spam requires an external agent. I find amavisd-new
> > works well in this respect - it integrates SpamAssassin and also amortizes
> > the startup cost by keeping it ready.
> Hi Bruce,
> How stable is amavisd? I run the spamd daemon that's part of SpamAssassin
> to avoid the startup costs, but very occassionally, it silently dies.
I've never had problems with spamd, over 150 days, FreeBSD 4.8, not a
qmail - qmail-qeueu, SA/f-prot.
i find qmail/qmail-queue performing faster compared to the amavisd-new
> If you're not seeing any such problems with amavisd, then that's something
> I'd want to try out.
Lou Kamenov <phayze at SecureRoot.org.uk>
More information about the Ukfreebsd