On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 15:28 -0500, Aaron Konstam wrote: > On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 16:14 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > Aaron Konstam wrote: > > > On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 12:11 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote: > > >> Aaron Konstam wrote: > > >>> On Mon, 2006-06-26 at 10:29 +0100, Samatason Ltd wrote: > > >>>> Hi > > >>>> > > >>>> What's the best approach to filtering out spam at server mailbox level? I am > > >>>> running FC5 and SendMail... > > >>>> > > >>>> Best Regards > > >>>> > > >>>> Chris > > >>>> > > >>> There seems to be a sisagreement on this but I would try spamasasassin. > > >>> The program is isntalled but you can find installation configuration > > >>> instructions on the web. > > >>> > > >>> Since sendmail runs procmail on each messgae it receives you can use > > >>> a .procmailrc script to run spamassassin and distribute your mail > > >>> (including the spam found) in to appropriate mail boxes. > > >> Running spamassassin using a milter has the advantage that you can > > >> reject the spam during the SMTP transaction. So in the rare case where a > > >> legitimate message is mis-identified as spam, the sender gets to know > > >> that it wasn't delivered. You can't safely do that using procmail. > > >> > > >> Paul. > > >> > > > Huh! I have being doing that for years byt having .procmailrc direct > > > identified spam to a special file. Doesn't that do it or do I not > > > understand you point? > > > > Doing this means that *you* get to see the mail identified as spam, when > > you look in the special file. Rejecting the message in the SMTP > > transaction means that the *sender* knows you didn't get the email, so > > they can either try resending a less-spammy message, or contacting you > > by other means if it's something important. No intervention needed on > > your part. > > > > Paul. > I get you point but we must get different kinds of spam. I get spam from > addresses that cannot or will not accept return mail. So it seems to me > I would be pelted by lots of returned mail I would have to deal with. That's not how it works. You are not generating a bounce (which would double-bounce back to you for undeliverable addresses as you say), you're just refusing to accept the message in the first place. Doing this will not result in you getting lots of returned mail. Paul.
