On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 20:58:27 -0500 Lisa L <exexpat2 [ at ] gmail [ dot ] com> wrote:
> It has been suggested that since we'll be moving to the new server,
> this is a good opportunity to reflect on our spam filtering methods. Brett
> Delmage recently encountered an issue where accidentally breaking the
> anti-spam headers related to the CanIt filtering, caused the content of his
> messages to disappear.
The issue was:
1) Spam/nonspam voting links were being added in the body of list mail, when
the mail was sent to <listname>@oclug.on.ca instead of
<listname>@lists.oclug.on.ca
2) When mailing to an @oclug.on.ca address to complain about this, anything
including and after the special "BEGIN ANTISPAM" line was stripped off,
because the antispam server strips off any of its own training links it
sees in inbound mail.
This is no longer an issue as I've disabled in-body training links for @oclug.on.ca
as well as for @lists.oclug.on.ca.
> Dave has generously offered to reconfigure this if we provide him with a
> complete list of all list addresses (that is, all @ lists.oclug.on.ca and
> @oclug.on.ca addresses) so they can be set to omit the anti-spam voting
> links.
I was given a list last week, but since I've turned off the training links (nobody
but me used them, I believe) there's no need to set up specific addresses to be omitted.
> So, we'd like your feedback: Would CanIt or SpamAssassin offer a
> simpler way to do our spam filtering, and why? (Dave, do you wish to
> specifically comment on this?) Lastly, would you be willing to do setup and
> configuration on the new server, and/or ongoing maintenance?
It would be both easier, and more effective, to use CanIt for spam filtering.
Essentially, anything SpamAssassin can do, CanIt can do, usually with
significantly less maintenance effort. The only reason to go with SpamAssassin
would be if OCLUG wanted to adopt a policy of using only FLOSS software.
On the last point, I have no interest in volunteering to set up and maintain
a separate standalone SpamAssassin installation. I don't want to spend my spare
time doing exactly what I do at work.
Cheers,
Dave