[Rspamd-Users] How to reject email subject/body message?
Stanislav
me at rooty.name
Fri Oct 20 20:20:26 UTC 2023
Hi,
I'm more or less familiar with mail server, and, overall, how it works.
I do not consider myself a guru tho, haha. I'm pretty much hosting a
mailbox for myself only at this point; everything was configured by me
from scratch a long time ago. I used to have just Postfix as mta using
built-in basic checks and rbls to reject spam. I've recently started
noticing legitimate emails getting rejected, so I'm experimenting with
this now.
I didn't use SpamAssassin or any other similar solution in the past.
Pretty much Rspamd is the first one I've decided to try.
What I'm expecting to achieve is the following:
- Rspamd renders a message, and based on some key patterns or text like
"you won million dollar" rejects the email.
I know it's inefficient, but a server with a "single" mailbox works just
fine for me. Currently, most of the spam Rspamd can handle, but I'm
still getting some of it, even tho I did configure Bayes training with
Dovecot/Sieve.
Best
> Hi there,
>
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023, Steve Witten wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 11:48 AM Stanislav via Users wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm relatively new to spam filtering systems.
>>> Could somebody please point me to the documentation or give an
>>> example
>>> of how to perform the following actions:
>>> - Reject an email with specific text in a body message.
>>> - Reject an email with specific text in a subject.
>>
>> See:
>>
>> https://rspamd.com/doc/modules/regexp.html
>
> If I may make an analogy, if the OP had asked someone to teach him how
> to swim then Mr. Witten's answer, although accurate, somewhat resembles
> throwing the questioner from the ten metre board over the diving pool.
>
> Stanislav: can you tell us how familiar you are with the structure of
>
> (1) emails in general and
>
> (2) MIME-structured emails in particular?
>
> It's especially important to know what you're dealing with before you
> try to filter mail because otherwise the results may be disappointing.
>
> --
>
> 73,
> Ged.
More information about the Users
mailing list