Priority on white/black lists

[Mark Martinec]

Miguel,

> I need to have some sort of priority in black/white lists, but currently 
> this field is in the mailaddr table...,
> so I can't have different priorities per recipient right?

I'm not sure I understand the problem. A wblist entry corresponds
to a sender & recipient pair. Why would you want to have both
a 'W' and a 'B' entry for the same exact pair?

Note that both the sender and the recipient can be either an exact
match, or any generalization on a domain and subdomain.
These are sorted by priority, so a more specific match should override
a more general match. In this sense you can have even now
multiple wblist entries matching a sender and a recipient, at different
levels of loose matching - the most specific match wins, assuming
the priority field is used as suggested in the examples.


README.lookups:

SQL lookups (e.g. for user+foo at example.com) are performed in order
which is usually specified by 'ORDER BY...DESC' in the SELECT statement;
otherwise the order is unspecified, which is only useful if just specific
entries exist in a database (e.g. full address always, not domain part only
or mailbox parts only).

The following order (implemented by sorting on the 'priority' field
in DESCending order, zero is low priority) is recommended, to follow
the same specific-to-general principle as in other lookup tables;
the first column is a suggested priority (the exact value does not matter
as long as the order is maintained):

9 - lookup for user+foo at sub.example.com
8 - lookup for user at sub.example.com (only if $recipient_delimiter is '+')
7 - lookup for user+foo (only if domain part is local)
6 - lookup for user     (only local; only if $recipient_delimiter is '+')
5 - lookup for @sub.example.com
3 - lookup for @.sub.example.com
2 - lookup for @.example.com
1 - lookup for @.com
0 - lookup for @.       (catchall)


> I'm thinking on creating a priority field in the table wblist, to have a 
> priority per wblist entry, mainly to prioritize white lists.
> Can this this be achieved by some other way?

Sure, if you want. Adjust the $sql_select_white_black_list accordingly.
I just don't see a point in doing so.

> How does a domain w/b list affect that domain's recipients?

wblist entries are per-recipient (i.e. keyed by a sender & recipient pair)

> How can we know the priority order in the case we have both
> domain w/b lists and recipient's w/b lists?

They are sorted by mailaddr.priority, the most specific address
should have the highest priority.


Michael Scheidell writes:
> actually, the entry in the wb field doesn't need to be a 'w' or a 'b' 
> (if I remember correctly)
> you can set it as a -100 for whitelist, and, say, +50 in b.

Correct. Hard w/b-listing is turned into a soft-wblisting this way.


> I've been digging a litle more and:
> 
> on  /usr/sbin/amavisd
> 
>   $sql_select_white_black_list =
>      'SELECT wb FROM wblist JOIN mailaddr ON wblist.sid=mailaddr.id'.
>      ' WHERE wblist.rid=? AND mailaddr.email IN (%k)'.
>      ' ORDER BY mailaddr.priority DESC';
> 
> In only uses mailaddr.priority for sorting, so I think there wblist.wb 
> is not expecting a numeric value...

amavisd-new-20040701 / amavisd-new-2.0 release notes :

- extended semantics of SQL field wblist.wb, which can hold a score value
  boost, which is interpreted as soft black/white-listing (the same semantics
  as the value in @score_sender_maps);


Mark