procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: More clamav testing (results)

2004-02-14 12:35:18
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004, Dallman Ross wrote:

As far as I've been able to determine the ONLY way to discover that
spamc failed to connect to spamd is to allow it to (attempt to)
rewrite the message header, and then look at the header to see whether
the X-Spam- lines have been added (if they weren't, no spamd).

I don't think I agree entirely.

OK, you're right.  With "spamc -c" you can always ignore the exit status
and look only at the output:

:0
SA_OUT=|spamc -c

:0
* SA_OUT ?? ^^0/0^^
{ LOG="spamc failed$NL" }

:0E
* SA_OUT ?? ^^-
{ LOG="negative score$NL" }

:0E
* SA_OUT ?? /\/.*^^
{ THRESHOLD=$MATCH }

:0a
* SA_OUT ?? ^^\/[^/]*
{ SA_SCORE=$MATCH }

*0a
* $ -$THRESHOLD^1
* $  $SA_SCORE^1
{ LOG="positive over $THRESHOLD$NL" }

:0E
{ LOG="postive score under $THRESHOLD or no output$NL" }

(Of course that assumes no one would set a negative threshold.)

But anyway, now we come to a big caveat about we have been mostly
silent, but which is pretty important: Procmail's var-capture code
(VAR=| program) is flawed.  We already know that it fails on some
systems under some compiles.  What is also known to me is that it
destroys memory space willy-nilly due to a bug in the code.

As I said elsewhere, I have a snapshot with a fix for this at
<http://www.well.com/user/barts/email/procmail-3.23pre.tar.gz>,
but Mike's other fixes sound interesting as well.


_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail