a way to set up a kind of 'catchall' |
Post Reply 
|
| Author | |
yapadu 
Senior Member 
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Topic: a way to set up a kind of 'catchall'Posted: 21 May 2011 at 9:29am |
|
We get emails like this a lot from our customers:
I would like to know if there is a way to set up a kind of 'catchall' email address, to where all email sent to users not yet added in the domain should be sent. Anyone else get questions from customers (or potential customers) like this? Does anyone have a solution to implement catchall address support? |
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
 |
|
|
AndrewD
Groupie 
Joined: 03 May 2008 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 71 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2011 at 9:33pm |
|
If i remember right from previos conversations with you, You are running spamfilter with an allowed list of users, as this is how you control your billing. As spamfilterISP will reject any meseage that is to a user that is not added to the allowed recipient list, there would be no way to have them forwarded on to a catchall.Besides this would be a loop around your billing procedure.If i am incorrect and you are not using an allowed recipient list then the catchall would have to be done at the end domain exchange server. This is certainly possible with Microsoft exchange.
|
|
|
Spamfilter web interface. www.tyrexpg.com.au
See http://www.logsat.com/SpamFilter/Forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6883 |
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 May 2011 at 9:43pm |
|
Yes, we are using the allowed list.
The catchall (as I see it) is similar in nature to the alias problem I was talking about before. I see both the alias & the catch all problems I am dealing with to be a limitation of spamfilter. As you mention the catch all can be done with exchange (and most other email systems). Any unknown address automatically would forward to a single specific mailbox. The problem with putting spamfilter in front (and doing billing control with the allowed list) is it takes away the ability. I know I can put *@domain.com in the allowed list and it would pass all email through, those who want the catchall could then process it on their server as you mention. Problem is spamfilter does not have a way to re-write the recipient address so again someone can have 1000 email addresses, enable the catchall and they get past the billing system (allowed list). Getting rid of the allowed list would also cause a massive amount of email to pass through our server to clients that should not be. It is excellent to have both for billing and the ability to stop invalid addresses from passing through the server. Then I run into the customers who want the catchall and I'm in a catch 22 not being able to offer it to those who want it. I want to see if anyone has a work around or if anyone else has the same need as we do; it can't be that we are the only group with this requirement.
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
AndrewD
Groupie
Joined: 03 May 2008 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 71 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 May 2011 at 9:52pm |
|
It is the old "you cant have your cake and eat it too"
I understand whta you want is the following steps to apply. 1. Email comes in to spamfilter 2. Email recipient is checked against allowed receivers. 2a. If passes recipient test then continue as normal 2b. If fails recipient test then change the recipient to {catchall@recipientdomain.com] and process as normal. (also probably require subject, or body to be modified to note who the original recipient should have been.) 3. Process email as normal. Currently there is no option to do this, and i dont know of any product that does have this. |
|
|
Spamfilter web interface. www.tyrexpg.com.au
See http://www.logsat.com/SpamFilter/Forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6883 |
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 May 2011 at 10:37pm |
|
Actually, what I want to do with the aliases and catch-all are very mainstream among hosted solutions. I can't believe more are not interested in the ability to have these things: Google Apps - Catch-all address Google Apps - Email aliases GFI MailProtection - Email aliases Spam Hero - Catch-all address CudaMail - Domain aliases I am not a user of these other services, but doing a search reveals what we want to offer is being offered by others and based on the number of queries from customers we receive these features are wanted by the end users. We never get requests for mail archiving or TLS support, but catch-all and aliases are requested often. We are currently trying to come up with a solution so we can remain competitive with others in the market, despite spamfilter not offering these things. One idea we have is to setup a Linux server, any customer who enables alias or catch-all will have their email routed to the Linux box after spamfilter processes and we can do it from there, but what a hassle.
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 May 2011 at 10:55pm |
|
Implementing the user alias and catch all seem fairly easy to me, while I am not the developer of spamfilter I have been a developer for 20+ years. Currently in authorized too email you might have something like this: dan@mail.com keira@mail.com mark@mail.com postmaster@mail.com support@mail.com It could allow something like this: dan@mail.com keira@mail.com mark@mail.com postmaster@mail.com support@mail.com alias@mail.com:mark@mail.com *@mail.com:dan@mail.com The re-write that is necessary is handled by spamfilter and your good to go with offering new services for paying enterprise customers. Edited by yapadu - 26 May 2011 at 10:56pm |
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
AndrewD
Groupie
Joined: 03 May 2008 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 71 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 May 2011 at 11:03pm |
|
Google Apps - Catch-all address Google Apps - Email aliases Google is refering to there GMail which is a complete solution (Spamfiltering - Mailbox) this could be done easily if you control the mailbox, however with spamfilter we are only contrlloing the first stage. GFI MailProtection - Email aliases As i have spoken to you before my Web interface does allow for EMail aliases. Spam Hero - Catch-all address As far as i can tell by reading their information what they are doing is providing the service for 30 days where it runs no allowed recipient list. After that date they are running a recipient list based on what they beleive is the real list. How are they generating this list? The only way i can see that it could be done is by either monitoring the daily spam reports and treating those that create a logon as true users, or they also provide an outgoing mail filter service and look for " no such user" administrator messages. Then after 30 days you can turn the feature back on if you want. Once again this is just like turning on or off the allowed recipient list. CudaMail - Domain aliases As above my custom web interface offers this. What i would propose is that you bill based on website logon accounts. and send out a daily report to users that tells them to logon to view there spam messages. This will allow you to dynamically build the user list that you bill on. It will also ensure that the customer continues to receive all good email addresses. currently what you are doing means that the customer MUST inform you (this may be via a website or whatever) every time that they create a new user / alias. As a network administrator this will be seen as a pain in the ass, and often forgotten. However by implementing a daily spam report that the user gets that if registered lists all the captured spam and if not then requests them to create an account (once only) to manage their spam, is not as much a burden. I implement this system on many of my clients that i (or my company) manage their network (so we do the adds of new users) and find that most users create their web logon within days of starting.
|
|
|
Spamfilter web interface. www.tyrexpg.com.au
See http://www.logsat.com/SpamFilter/Forums/forum_posts.asp?TID=6883 |
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 26 May 2011 at 11:09pm |
|
We have the same solution as what you call aliases (I don't consider them aliases though and we call them something else), where users get a single quarantine report area but from the backed the functionality is different.
I don't think there are many real enterprise systems using spamfilter, or this issue would come up more often.
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
ImInAfrica
Groupie
Joined: 27 June 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 60 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 June 2011 at 8:22am |
|
Hi,
Access the Theme Editor from the Administration > Appearance > Editor menu. Click on the header.php file, make the changes and save. this should work for you. If you have problems let me know.
|
|
|
|
|
ImInAfrica
Groupie
Joined: 27 June 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 60 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 June 2011 at 8:23am |
|
oops, wrong forum. sorry about that.
|
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 June 2011 at 6:49pm |
|
ImInAfrica,
It happens to the best'of'em at one time or another. Edited by yapadu - 20 June 2011 at 8:56pm |
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
ImInAfrica
Groupie
Joined: 27 June 2006 Location: FL, USA Status: Offline Points: 60 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 June 2011 at 7:31pm |
|
Yapadu, i take GREAT offense to your remark above! GREAT offense.
This was a genuine mistake with posting to the wrong forum. I have been a paid user of spamfilter for over 6 years, and am disgusted that you think I post in order to get backlinks. I was going to comment to you about the problem you described above, and kindly provide you with the scripts I wrote in order to resolve it in the quarantine area. I guess I won't be providing you with the scripts. The solution is very simple in your quarantine area (whatever scripts you use to access it) you need to create an alias for the user that logs in. your SQL query will then pick up all the spam for that users and it's aliases. As far as I am aware SpamFilter was designed to be as seemless as possible to the mail process (Roberto can correct me if that has changed). So the less mail logic there is in SF the better it is. What you're requesting above is a mail server feature, which will most likely make SF more cumbersome. Now, if you want to know anything about virtual offices, feel free to ask me! |
|
|
|
|
yapadu
Senior Member
Joined: 12 May 2005 Status: Offline Points: 297 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 20 June 2011 at 8:49pm |
|
A modification of the web GUI is not something I am looking for, we have that already but we call the feature Shadow Account not an alias. An alias to us uses the exact same whitelist/blacklist etc. etc. It should be the exact same and all incoming messages to specifically to the target mailbox.
Yes, directing the incoming email to the correct mailbox can be processed by the email server itself. However, we are running spamfilter enterprise and produce spam protection as a service for others. We do not control the final destination server. The result is if we leave it up to our users, they can cheat us on every alias if they wish. I suppose we could offer a limited number of aliases, knowing that we are potentially allowing additional mailbox filtering. As it stands right now, to us at least it seems like the limitation is in spamfilter. |
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am a user of SF, not an employee. Use any advice offered at your own risk. |
|
|
|
Topic Options|
Post Reply
|
|
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.