Re: configure anomy sanitizer to drop not defang ?
> What's wrong with sendmail?
Well, mostly that I've bought into the postfix fanboy propaganda that
postfix is superior for speed, security, ease of use and world peace.
##########
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Lucas Albers wrote:
>
> Dan MacNeil said:
> >
> > anomy sanitizer works well with postfix, but as far as I can tell, it
> > can't be configured to drop messages instead of defanging them.
> >
> > I plan to configure sanitizer to add a tag to bad messages and then use
> > procmail to quarantine messages with that tag. Is there better way?
> >
> > Is there something that does what sanitizer, works with postfix and allows
> > me to drop messages completely?
> >
> > Mimedefang seems ideal, but it only works with sendmail.
>
> What's wrong with sendmail?
> I use it with mimedefang, and it works awesome.
> I can do spam filtering, greylisting, ptr-helo checking, virus scanning,
> extension filtering, mimetype-filtering, zipfile extension blocking,etc.
> The correct behavior with mimedefang is to generate a bounce for rejected
> spam, and discard for detected virus's. This is all at the 5xx level.
> You can also query internal mail servers/ldap servers to determine if an
> account exists before accepting mail from that sender or recipient.
> So you only accept mail from a sender, if that sender exists on one of
> your internal systems.
> My external mx is a debian sendmail 8.12.3, mimedefang 2.38 system and it
> handles all department mail load fine.
>
Reply to: