[Mailman-Users] Looping Moderator Approval Requests / Mailman&Exim

[Mike Peachey]

Mark Sapiro wrote:
> Mike Peachey wrote:
> 
>> Mark Sapiro wrote:
>>> This is the problem. Exim is piping mail to listname-owner at example.com
>>> to "| /path/to/mail/mailman/ post listname" and it should be piped to
>>> "| /path/to/mail/mailman/ owner listname".
>>>
>> But surely, that would affect a single separate e-mail sent directly to 
>> list-owner@ ? If I send to that address, delivery succeeds to the 
>> correct recipients.
> 
> 
> OK. But then why does your email to listname-owner get properly
> delivered to the owners, but Mailman's mail to listname-owner get
> delivered to the list?
> 

I have discovered that the problem lies with the way SpamAssassin is 
implemented, but I'm still not sure of the best way around it.

We use SpamAssassin via Exim's spamd_address directive via a unix 
socket, so every single e-mail that is received by the mail server is 
run through SpamAssassin before it's routed. We then use the Spam 
Filters option in Mailman to filter based on the X-Spam_Bar: header.

The problem is that when Mailman sends a moderator request, it attaches 
the moderated message. Mailman sends this message from it-bounces@ to 
it-owner@ HOWEVER because the original spam message is attached, 
SpamAssassin marks mailman's "moderator approval needed" message as spam 
with the relevant headers.

When this e-mail to it-owner@ is received by Mailman, because it matches 
the spam filter rules for the it@ list, it holds the message and sends 
out another moderator request with both previous messages attached.

This then suggests that we have two options:
1. Find a way to stop mailman from attaching the held message to a 
moderator approval request e-mail
2. Find a way to reconfigure Exim & SpamAssassin so that all messages 
are passed through SpamAssasin, except those that are routed to Mailman, 
and then use the info available for integrating mailman and SpamAssassin 
to have Mailman call SpamAssassin itself, although this does seem like a 
pretty inefficient way to deal with it because everything will still end 
up going through spamd.

I heartily appreciate any comments on this as I'm a bit stuck with the 
best way to proceed.
-- 
Kind Regards,

__________________________________________________

Mike Peachey, IT
Tel: +44 114 281 2655
Fax: +44 114 281 2951
Jennic Ltd, Furnival Street, Sheffield, S1 4QT, UK
Comp Reg No: 3191371 - Registered In England
http://www.jennic.com
__________________________________________________