At 20:33 2002-07-02 +0100, Alan Clifford wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Professional Software Engineering wrote:
PSE> Keep in mind that if you REPROCESS mail - manually unpack a mailbox
PSE> into your procmail filters, you should have some way to disable that
PSE> particular filter, or you'll hose yourself for it.
Good point, But I'm comparing the date date with the from_ date so I
should be ok.
I;m curious - if you've been running this for a few days at this point (or
reprocessing any old mailboxes with it), how effective has it been, and
what sort of false positives have you seen?
I'm actually considering utilizing something similar for a mailing list
preprocessor (a set of procmail filters running in front of majordomo to
identify and respond to common user problems). In this particular
application, I figure we can direct seriously "lagged" messages to the
listadmin for approval - not because they're suspected to be spam, but
because they might be messages the user sent which got tied up in their
mail server - or in the listserver backup MX (say if there were network
problems), and as a result, the message MIGHT have already been resent - or
it's a "is the list up" type of message, etc. By automatically tagging
such messages and directing them to the admin, the server can avoid crap
Actually, I don't seem to mind too much browsing the index of the spam box
but I get really irritated at spam in my mail box.
I have a daily report that dumps relevant log entries from my procmail log
into a statistics mailbox for me. Stuff like:
SPAM: No To/cc/bcc
INFO: SpamFilter v02.00.05 PSE 2001.12.12 03:06:14
>From guest(_at_)guest(_dot_)com Thu Jul 4 23:12:13 2002
Folder: gzip -9fc >>
valid mail back to a dedicated box at my pop box host. I think I am
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
procmail mailing list