[Rspamd-Users] Actions/negative...

[Michelle Sullivan]

Still having trouble with actions, can easily define new actions with scores but defining actions without scores chucks errors and is hit and miss on whether it’s returned or not (in 3.13).

But I thought came to mind is it possible to define an action with a negative score?  (It would need to work like a positive score with it’s base be zero - so not ’is greater than’) eg would be good to do:

actions {
	whitelisted = -100.00;
}

And not have anything that is -100.0 -> 0.0 marked as ‘whitelisted’ ..

FWIW without using ‘force_actions’ (which I don;’t have a need for) this is supposed to work:

    malware = {
        flags = ["no_threshold"];
    }

    virus = {
        flags = ["no_threshold"];
    }

    hard-reject = {
        flags = ["no_threshold"];
    }

    discard = {
        flags = ["no_threshold"];
    }


However, it’s hit and miss on whether I can get ‘hard-reject’ or ‘virus’ returned in 3.13… defining:

   virus = 999
   malware = 998
   hard-reject = 100

Does work though.. the only problem being if I set the action in a lua script it sets the score (and then might add to it)..

The idea of an ‘Action’ (correct me if I’m wrong) is a suggestion to the MTA (or caller) of what to do with a message.. these can be based on score (ie hitting a threshold) but what about if it’s a virus and you just want to tell the MTA it’s a virus (or has one onboard) regardless of score and without changing the score?

..anyhow.. will take that through support channels if that’s the way it should be done.. but thought I’d throw it out there for others..

FWIW a configtest here with the ‘no_threshold’ and no scores returns this:

[michelle at avas-ingress (avas-ingress-test) ~]$ rspamadm configtest
unknown element in actions section: phishing
unknown element in actions section: soft-reject
unknown element in actions section: malware
unknown element in actions section: virus
unknown element in actions section: hard-reject

Regards,

Michelle