From: "Patrick Sneyers" <cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com>
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=mail.tffenterprises.com; client-ip=91.183.137.138; envelope-from=patrick@bulckens.com
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.18\))
Subject: Re: [CGPSA] Delivering spam to Junk mailbox of each recipient
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 09:53:29 +0200
References: <list-19440121@mail.tffenterprises.com>
To: CGPSA Discussion List <cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-19440121@mail.tffenterprises.com>
Message-Id: <388E5B98-6F66-4D07-B194-18827D50E0F4@bulckens.com>


> Op 29 mei 2018, om 09:09 heeft Palvelin Postmaster =
<cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com> het volgende geschreven:
>=20
>=20
>> On 29 May 2018, at 9:37, Patrick Sneyers =
<cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com> wrote:
>>=20
>>> Op 29 mei 2018, om 08:17 heeft Palvelin Postmaster =
<cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com> het volgende geschreven:
>>>=20
>>> Hi,
>>>=20
>>> I have a system-wide rule which delivers all recognized spam =
addressed to all domains and recipients to one centralized spam folder =
(of an account created exclusively for this purpose) for temporary =
storage and teaching SpamAssassin=E2=80=99s bayes filter.
>>>=20
>>> I=E2=80=99m considering changing my strategy to having a per-user =
spam folder instead. I=E2=80=99m thinking this could, at the very least, =
empower the users to actually receive these messages and manage possible =
false positives.
>>>=20
>>> Does anyone have any experience or insights about the strengths and =
weaknesses of alternate handling strategies?
>>>=20
>>> What would be the best way to implement this? Do I just need to make =
a =E2=80=99Store In=E2=80=99 domain-wide rule for each domain instead of =
the single system-wide rule I have now?
>>>=20
>>=20
>> You can use this option in cgpsa.conf (line 552 in my file), and keep =
using the server wide rule.
>=20
> Ahh=E2=80=A6I had forgotten about that. Thanks for the reminder! :)
>=20
> So, here=E2=80=99s my current server-wide processing rule. Do I just =
need to delete the =E2=80=99Store In=E2=80=99 action and tweak the =
cgpsa.conf dma settings?
>=20
> Subject is *SPAM-PALVELIN*
> Header Field is X-Spam-Flag: YES*=20
>=20
> Add Header
> 	X-Spam-Global: YES
> Write To Log
> 	Spam (GLOBAL) Detected
> Store In
> 	~spam/Junk-SpamAssassin
> Discard

After setting dma in cgpsa.conf (and restarting extfilter), you can =
disable that rule completely. Just keep the one above, with the =
"ExternalFilter =3D  cgpsa" action.
I don't add headers in CGP. I tweak headers in SA local.cf
You'll lose the logging though.

I don't know what would happen if you keep this rule active. It might =
take precedence, or duplicate the messages in your folder? Maybe it does =
nothing at all? Definitely worth an experiment :)


>=20
>> Of course, learning spam/ham becomes a bit more complicated then.
>=20
> Do you mean in a technical or practical sense? I currently have a =
script which learns spam daily from all folders which follow specified =
naming conventions (Junk*, Spam*, etc.). I don=E2=80=99t see a need to =
make any changes to it.

Then you're all set!
Would you be willing to share that script? :)


>=20
>=20
>> # A flag that determines whether messages tagged as spam will be =
filed
>> # automatically using direct mailbox addressing. This eliminates the =
need
>> # for users to add rules to their accounts to handle spam filtering, =
but
>> # only works on systems where direct mailbox addressing is enabled.
>=20
> Where does one enable DMA in CGP?

Settings - Mail - Local (routing)


Patrick=


------------------------------------------------------------------------=09=

zwartopwit.be - Drukkerij Bulckens
http://www.zwartopwit.be
Beestig drukwerk van A tot XXL

Industriezone Herentals
Grensstraat 9, 2270 Herenthout
+32 (0) 14 28 58 78
------------------------------------------------------------------------