> The patch covers a very narrow situation where you have user accounts on > the MX. I'd be more happy if we could think of a more general mechanism > to lookup whitelist the ACL. I know my patch addresses only a specific set of circumstances and would like to see some movement towards a more useful way for end users to opt in to, as well as out of, greylisting. The patch doesn't work for our central mail service, which only handles filtering and forwarding to mailboxes on other servers. We would like to have a solution which doesn't rely on user mailboxes or user accounts but is still straightforward for users to update. It's a small, inadequate, step that gets around an immediate problem in our local environment. I hope the resulting discussion will help foster the development of a useful back end. > For now we have local file. What about looking up information through > DNS? Or LDAP? Anyone have good ideas about how it could work? We have a homebrewed system in place for opting out of DNSBL-based blacklisting that uses dynamic updates on a local DNS server, user authentication for local users, a key sent via email for remote users, and a small sendmail config localism. It could be expanded to work for greylisting, but it is basically a kludge which I would rather see die than perpetuate. We have political issues around LDAP here that would make it difficult but not impossible to sell an LDAP-based solution. That said, if someone comes up with an LDAP interface, we'll find a way to use it. We're hoping for something not tied to a user's account(s) or the mail spool because these resources may not be available to the server where the milter is running. A database backend (file-based like Berkeley or using a real DB server that speaks SQL) would be fine for us and probably has the most flexibility. We don't get them now (that anyone's told me about), but I anticipate requests which are more complex than "do or don't subject all email addressed to me (or all mail from a specific domain) to greylisting". I'd like to see a real-time configurable back end which can quickly check (in a defined order not necessarily identical to the one below): - should (sender,recipient) be greylisted or whitelisted? - should (sender domain,recipient) be greylisted or whitelisted? - should (recipient) be greylisted or whitelisted? - should (sender) be greylisted or whitelisted? - should (sender domain) be greylisted or whitelisted? and fall through to default processing if none of the lookups yields a result. I'm not convinced the set of questions above is the canonical one to use: it's just what came off the top of my head. -- Dawn Keenan, Information Systems and Technology University of Waterloo, Waterloo ON
Message
Re: [milter-greylist] patch for user-controlled opt-out
2005-08-22 by Dawn Keenan
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.