I'm trying to clarify the various ways in which I could set up Postfix + Dovecot + SpamAssassin under CentOS-7, and I'd welcome any comments on the following remarks. As far as I can see there are 3 standard ways of setting this up: 1. Use amavisd 2. Use dovecot + pigeonhole/sieve 3. Use spamass-milter At present I'm following (2), but am thinking of going over to (1), since this seems simpler. (Amavisd wasn't available when I set up CentOS-7, so I didn't consider it then.) It seems to me that (2) is using dovecot in a slightly odd way, since as far as I can see dovecot normally takes email from ~/Maildir/cur/ and then moves marked spam. I'm not quite sure if (3) is a genuine alternative, or if it is why it is not the standard? -- Timothy Murphy e-mail: gayleard /at/ eircom.net School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
Am 29.08.2014 um 01:33 schrieb Timothy Murphy:> I'm trying to clarify the various ways in which I could set up > Postfix + Dovecot + SpamAssassin under CentOS-7, > and I'd welcome any comments on the following remarks. > > As far as I can see there are 3 standard ways of setting this up: > 1. Use amavisd > 2. Use dovecot + pigeonhole/sieve > 3. Use spamass-milter > > At present I'm following (2), but am thinking of going over to (1), > since this seems simpler. > (Amavisd wasn't available when I set up CentOS-7, so I didn't consider it > then.) > > It seems to me that (2) is using dovecot in a slightly odd way, > since as far as I can see dovecot normally takes email from ~/Maildir/cur/ > and then moves marked spam.not dovecot related - it's a matter of reject or accept spam you are talking about spam filtering and forgot to mention that in the subject - in general dovecot should not have to deal with the topic spam filer because it should not see it at all> I'm not quite sure if (3) is a genuine alternative, > or if it is why it is not the standard?define standard - but amavis or spamass-milter are not topic of your subject - in general if you service mail for others you need to reject spam or have to deliver it and so you need a before-queue or become backcatter if you drop it after accept the drawback of a milter is that filtering happens while the dilvering client is still connected and you have limited ressources in most cases with a well configured postscreen and RBL scroing that should not be a problem until you have a really lot incoming legit mail flow -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 181 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20140829/8567272b/attachment.sig>
TM> I'm trying to clarify the various ways in which I could set up TM> Postfix + Dovecot + SpamAssassin under CentOS-7, TM> and I'd welcome any comments on the following remarks. TM> As far as I can see there are 3 standard ways of setting this up: TM> 1. Use amavisd TM> 2. Use dovecot + pigeonhole/sieve TM> 3. Use spamass-milter TM> At present I'm following (2), but am thinking of going over to (1), TM> since this seems simpler. TM> (Amavisd wasn't available when I set up CentOS-7, so I didn't consider it TM> then.) TM> It seems to me that (2) is using dovecot in a slightly odd way, TM> since as far as I can see dovecot normally takes email from ~/Maildir/cur/ TM> and then moves marked spam. TM> I'm not quite sure if (3) is a genuine alternative, TM> or if it is why it is not the standard? --- spampd [I'm doing it under Ubuntu, but used to do it under RHEL] spdmpd is a pre-accept daemon that processes for SA - where you can simply reject mail with SA scores higher than X, instead of simply tagging them as spam. Typical is: Score above 10, reject before MTA acceptance. Score from 5-10, tag as spam, but accept for delivery. --- However, I'm working on moving to amavisd instead of spampd. But it's almost no extra work to use spampd vs SA alone and amavisd seems like more work than spampd. [It's certainly more complex.] YMMV. -Greg