From: "Palvelin Postmaster postmaster@palvelin.fi" Received: from posti.palvelin.fi ([83.150.109.27] verified) by mail.tffenterprises.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.7) with ESMTPS id 20034787 for cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:39:33 -0700 Received-SPF: pass receiver=mail.tffenterprises.com; client-ip=83.150.109.27; envelope-from=postmaster@palvelin.fi X-ClamAV-Checked: YES DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=palvelin.fi; h=from :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; s=posti; bh=EeZoa5HI 1s/7+q2cIgftfgDy4HZp5GsT8CJi3RNkJCc=; b=b0k2Az9cRNvmDGKqFe5bya6S qEeS03/oWb8iQWE7QPeZ0kYBg0yOORQ3wpZTlW8kVBHxWP5v7NIsCy6x0z/9ahzn 3lE648JKPmxKC9yzY8nBj0sj0WV+mX19b0MYVVR7S89Wapid2KxW3BRMJE4FK4bn E4Q2W2JjD4ZOJ+8RER8= Received: from [68.5.76.172] (account postmaster@palvelin.fi HELO [192.168.0.6]) by palvelin.fi (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.2.12) with ESMTPSA id 10631213 for cgpsa-discuss@mail.tffenterprises.com; Sat, 15 Jun 2019 07:39:19 +0300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: [CGPSA] Delivering spam to Junk mailbox of each recipient Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:39:15 -0700 References: To: CGPSA Discussion List In-Reply-To: Message-Id: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) > On 28 May 2018, at 23.37, Patrick Sneyers = wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> Op 29 mei 2018, om 08:17 heeft Palvelin Postmaster = 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 >> -- >> Palvelin.fi Hostmaster >> postmaster@palvelin.fi >>=20 >=20 >=20 > You can use this option in cgpsa.conf (line 552 in my file), and keep = using the server wide rule. > Of course, learning spam/ham becomes a bit more complicated then. >=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. If > # this setting is enabled, spam will be filed in the mailbox specified = by > # the "spam_mailbox_name" setting; the mailbox will be created when = needed > # if it does not exist. > # > use_dma_spam_mailbox =3D true >=20 > # The name of the mailbox to use for direct mailbox addressing when=20 > # the "use_dma_spam_mailbox" setting is enabled.=20 > # > spam_mailbox_name =3D Junk I=E2=80=99m now testing this. For some reason, my Junk mailboxes remain = empty even though CGP log indicates mail should end there and the junk = mailbox mbox files got created. I wonder what could be wrong? I have = direct mailbox routing enabled.