Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Untangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default Spam Blocker - Feature Request

    I have recently used the SpamBlocker to mark messages rather than quarantine them in order to allow the Exchange server to handle the spam flag and automatically categorize messages into user's junk e-mail folder. However, the default behavior of "Mark" is not constructive to my users. The default, and non-changeable, behavior is that the messages are rolled up into an attachment and passed along with the word [SPAM] in the subject.

    My request is 1 of 2 things or both:

    1) Allow us to set the SpamBlocker to "Pass" but continue to use the "Drop Superspam" feature. This would allow me to disable the message mangling that Untangle is doing when it "Marks" a message. But, I don't want to lose the superspam feature.

    2) Or, allow us to change the behavior of the marked messages so we can disable or modify the subject header rewrite, and the report_safe option that I assume is causing spamassassin to roll the messages up into an attachment.

    I'm kind of surprised we can't already do these things. But, I've never tried using Untangle in this fashion before and now I realize just how bad this seemingly simple feature is needed.

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I use only spam blocker lite, but it should work in a similar way in the full version.

    I set the custom strength and a value that is higher than super spam threshold. in that way super spam is dropped, and regular spam is getting through.

  3. #3
    Untangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Thanks for the tip. That makes sense. However, to be a little more clear about my situation (and maybe you have an answer for this), I have a Microsoft Exchange server setup behind Untangle. I have setup a transport rule in Exchange that sees the "X-Spam-Flag" header and if it is Yes then it moves the message to the user's junk e-mail folder.

    So, while your solution is actually ingenious, it would prevent me from marking spam messages with this flag that are above a certain score while dropping the really high scores. Using your method it would drop the high scores, but it would not add the X-Spam-Flag header for lower scored spammy messages.

    How are you working with Untangle to filter "non-super spam" messages that are still over a certain spam score?

  4. #4
    Untangle Junkie dmorris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    San Carlos, CA
    Posts
    17,747

    Default

    Soap's method is ingenious.
    It will still add the headers so I think that would be the best way.

    You could also just set it to pass with drop super-spam enabled, but you'll have to edit the settings file directly since the UI doesn't allow this.
    Attention: Support and help on the Untangle Forums is provided by volunteers and community members like yourself.
    If you need Untangle support please call or email support@untangle.com

  5. #5
    Untangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Hi dmorris. Thanks for the reply. Soap's method is great, but unfortunately I am only looking for a boolean "is spam" or "is not spam." unfortunately, I don't know of a way to actually look at the spam-score in the headers and act upon it. Regex doesn't meet the requirements and that's about the only tool I have at my disposal. It could get quite complicated and not very flexible. That's why I like the simple spam-flag. Unfortunately, that flag won't be set if I don't have the spam score threshold set at the level I need it at.

    In regards to the settings. I found them a few days ago. Can't remember exactly where but they were part of the uvm under a spamblocker .js file. I got excited thinking I had found a way to do exactly what you said. Unfortunately, when I manually modified the settings the drop super spam setting still wouldn't work. i.e. I set the pass message setting and left the super spam setting turned on also. It seemed to ignore that setting. All I did was "power cycle" the spam blocker in the rack to load the settings. Did I do something wrong? Can you confirm this behavior? If so, I'll go back in and mess with it again - I probably just screwed up. It was after several hours of other attempts to find what I wanted, and I was tired.

  6. #6
    Untangler
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Good news. I solved the problem. By accident.

    I was looking for those setting files again and came across the following file:
    /usr/share/untangle/web/webui/script/untangle-node-spamblocker/settings.js

    It appears to control the behavior of the SpamBlocker configuration web pages.

    I modified the following function on Line 74 and added the text in RED:
    //enable super spam if quarantine is selected from the drop down
    enableSuperSpam: function(elem) {
    var dsfq = Ext.getCmp('drop-super-spam');
    var ssv = Ext.getCmp('spamblocker_smtpSuperStrengthValue');
    var newValue = elem.getValue();
    if(elem.disabled==true) {
    dsfq.disable();
    ssv.disable();
    } else if(newValue == 'QUARANTINE' || newValue == 'MARK' || newValue == 'PASS') {
    dsfq.enable();
    if(dsfq.getValue()) {
    ssv.enable();
    } else {
    ssv.enable();
    }
    } else {
    dsfq.setValue(0);
    dsfq.disable();
    ssv.disable();
    }
    //Ext does not gray out the label of a textfield!
    if(ssv.disabled) {
    ssv.fireEvent('disable');
    } else {
    ssv.fireEvent('enable');
    }
    },

    This changed the behavior of the configuration page so that it no longer greys out the drop super spam option when I choose "Pass." I figured this is a more complete solution as I can now configure untangle right from the spamblocker configuration page to do what I want. I have confirmed that dropping super spam functions properly and that messages that are over my spam threshold are flagged as spam but no modification to the subject or body is performed. Perfect!

    Now, what's the chances of getting such a simple fix included in the next release so I don't have to worry about this getting wiped out on the next update?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2