Re: procmail, razor and spam WAS: Question/Suggestion

[FancyLad <fancylad myrealbox com>]

On 2002.02.01 05:06 Carlos Morgado wrote:
> well, procmail can bu used to achieve that, but i guess it wouldn't
> hurt to let user specify what 'procmail' means. i'm amazed we didn't 
> get
> "balsa can't find /really/weird/path/procmail" reports yet :)

I realise that you can use procmail to send an email to the standard in 
of a utility.  However the emails I'm interested in are emails that 
"fell through" the spam filter (SpamAssasin in this case, which Sets 
some X-spamassasin headers for procmail to look through) and there is 
no way for procmail to determine which messages that "fell through" are 
legitimate mail and which are spam that hasn't been reported to the 
razor.  It takes someone manually going through the mail to say "hey 
this is spam."  How would they then easily flag the message in such a 
way that procmail could catch it (setting another header or something) 
and then re-processing it through procmail.

Unless I'm misunderstanding your suggestion, I don't believe that 
procmail would work in this case.  If procmail could identify which are 
the spam and therefore should be reported to razor... there would be no 
need for spamassassin or to report it to begin with.

Bryan