On Fri, Oct 03, 2003 at 09:06:31PM +0000, Paul Mackinney wrote: > I've been reading the various spam threads, I'm certainly > getting my share of hits from the various worms going > around. Clearly I can do better can people provide some > clear recommendations? > > Currently I'm using exim, receiving w/fetchmail and > sending to smarthost. I've learned how to write and > test an exim-compatible .forward file that works > fairly well, although I keep having to add more rules > as the attributions for the fake MS updates keep changing > (really I have to go back to the docs and see if I can > filter out any message with a *.exe or *.pif attachment.) > > So one question is: does procmail really work better or > provide more features than .forward? Is it worth > investing the time and energy to learn how to write > procmail filters? IMO - a) Yes b) No. .forward and little shell scripts perform for me functions for which other people occasionallly post procmail recipes, and save the effort of learning a third package with Sanskrit config syntax. YMMV. > A second question is: I understand that if you install > and configure the mailfilter package, that you can use > mutt to initiate your pop connections and filter mail > at the server. I have broadband, do I really care about > this option? I'd always understood that having mutt > run your pop connections was basically an option for > people running PPP. s/that.*,// Mutt and mailfilter do not depend on each other. You care about this if you use POP to get your mail... > Finally: I'm poised to start running a 24x7 server for > the first time, I'm contemplating making it a true > mailserver for incoming and outgoing. ...in this case you don't care. You can reject the viruses and other rubbish at SMTP time. -- Pigeon Be kind to pigeons Get my GPG key here: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21C61F7F
Attachment:
pgpc4xvVru25v.pgp
Description: PGP signature