[Mimedefang] Spam with more than one recipient - reject or not?

[Alan Premselaar]

Michal Jankowski wrote:
> There are two users - user A and user B. User A wants to receive
> everything, user B wants to have all spam mail rejected (with
> action_bounce, so in case of a false positive the sender is notified).
> 
> There comes a mail addressed to both A and B. What should mimedefang
> do?
> 
> 1. Bounce
>    Pro: B doesn't get unwanted spam
>         Sender is notified
>    Con: It's not delivered to A
> 
> 2. Deliver to A only
>    Pro: B doesn't get unwanted spam
>         A gets everything
>    Con: The sender thinks they both received it
> 
> 3. Deliver to A and B
>    Pro: A gets everything
>         No problem with false positives
>    Con: B gets unwanted spam
> 
> 4. ?
> 
> Any ideas?

Michal,

It seems to me like the 'most ideal' option would be 1. I say this 
because if someone sent mail to A & B that got scored high enough to be 
bounced but it wasn't actually spam, then at least the sender is 
notified that it got rejected by the filters and they can fix the mail 
and send again.

2 would be my second option if A didn't accept the fact that if the mail 
scored high enough to be bounced that the likelyhood of it being spam 
outweighed the likelyhood of it being a FP. The problem is that if it is 
a FP in scenario 2, nobody knows and thus the problem can't be fixed.

3 would be the 'safest' option in the fact that no mail is being 
rejected or discarded, but it's certainly not an ideal installation.  It 
would bring up the "why do we even have a spam filter anyways?" question 
from B quite often I would think.

I personally do global rejection if the mail scores above a certain 
score, otherwise I add spam headers and pass it on to the user to do 
with as they please (i sort mine into a spam folder).

To date I've had 0 complaints about it and nobody has contacted me 
saying "my mail got rejected, why?" (that doesn't necessarily mean that 
someone hasn't thought that but just not known how to get ahold of me, 
however)

so, that being said, i'd choose door #1.

Alan