In message
<Pine(_dot_)GSO(_dot_)3(_dot_)95(_dot_)971209001742(_dot_)10033A-100000(_at_)acme(_dot_)sb(_dot_)west(_dot_)net>,
david h
unt writes:
[snip]
your action here
Hmm. Any good way to use $=w in one of these? I don't want to duplicate
effort on matching my fairly variable "local domains".
If by "bounce" you mean sending mail to the spammer, I think it is bad
practice. If the bounce even gets to the spammer, the spammer drops it on
the floor unseen.
Yeah, but often the bounce gets to the relay site, so they know what's
going on. (And some spammers will give up on a user unknown, if it
doesn't *look* like procmail.)
If you _must_ return the mail, set EXITCODE=77 ahead of the recipe that
delivers spam to your spam-folder or /dev/null. That returns mail with a
notice of "insufficient permissions". These returns still get dropped on
the floor by spammers and doubles your systems load in handling your spam.
The return may still wind up in your system administrators lap. If it's
junk, treat it like junk, and just recycle the bytes.
Yeah, well, being the sysadmin, I have an interest in protecting him.
-s