On Wed, 1 May 2002, Ken Murchison wrote:
>
>
> "Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> >
> > Is there any chance that the 'spam' extension to sieve is going to get
> > added to the CVS? *cross fingers*
>
> I don't know about Larry, but I don't plan on adding it, for several
> reasons:
>
> 1. Nobody has made a good enough case for this belonging in Cyrus
> instead of the MTA (yes, I know that Sieve can be used anywhere, but
> this discussion has been in the context of Cyrus).
Cyrus IMAPd, IMHO, is meant to be used in a 'black box environment' ... no
user accounts or directories, which is how we set ours up here ... with
the extra spam extension in Sieve ("the filter"), end users would have the
option of enabling/disabling the filtering as/when they wish to ... also,
by putting it in "the filter", the end user has an option of *not*
filtering email coming from specific senders, so, for instance, the
postmaster account wouldn't have any spam filtering done for all email
coming from the local machine, or things like that ...
In the MTA, in a 'black box environment', a user has *zero* control over
how the spam filtering is applied, or if it even *is* applied ... which
also means *alot* of sites will not/do not implement it for fear of that
*one* person that will cry foul that someone is 'filtering their mail' ...
as part of "the filter", there is no filtering being done *unless* a user
wants it, at the MTA level, *all* email is filtered regardless of a users
desire ...
> 2. It goes against the design of Sieve, which does not call external
> programs (Sieve is not procmail or an anti-SPAM measure).
I don't know ... how many ppl using Sieve out there spend a large portion
of their time doing exactly that? figuring out effective rules to
filter out their spam?
As for the 'running of external programs' ... personally, I see that as a
security issue, as it prevents users from running arbitrary programs ...
if this were added, even with a configure option to compile in as desired,
you are limiting the 'external programs' to what the SysAdmin installed
into the system and wants the users to have access to ...
Personally, I'd love to see an if(virus) thrown into the mix too ...
All I'm advocating is putting more control into the hands of the end users
as to what they want to have happen to their email ... if they want
spam/virii, who am I to take that away from them? But give the end-users
the *tools* to make that decision on their own, which Sieve currently does
not give ... draft-segmuller-sieve-relation-01.txt doesn't give them that
choice either, as you are still controlling the flow of email without the
user have a choice of whether he/she *wants* it to be controlled ...
> 4. Sendmail/milter works fine for me.
if you have spamassassin working with Sendmail/Milter, I know there are a
*ton* of ppl on the spamassassin mailing list that would love to hear your
success story ... or do you run it on a system of one? There have been
several postings there (myself included) that talk about how they have to
restart the daemons whenever sendmail receives two messages
simultaneously, and nobody appears to know how to fix it ...
> If it would help, I would consider implementing
>
> http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-segmuller-sieve-relation-01.txt
IMHO, this is only half a solution, and one that is definitely useful as a
'second stage' from the 'spam extension' ... if(spam) && score > x would
be *very* cool ...
