I told you to score such domains elsewhere - just do it and the result is 
the same like you wanted.

for example:

bombHeaderRe:

\nDKIM-Signature:(?:[ \t]*[^= \;]+=[^= \;]+\;(?:\r\n)?)+?[ \t]*([di]=\@?(
The_Wanted_IDENTITY))\;=>the_wanted_negative_score

currently the (?(DEFINE).......) is not working with assp (is destroyed if 
a-d-n-o-r is not set for the file) - but the next version will do it  - 
and you can use:

(?(DEFINE)(?<IDENTITY10>the_wanted_identity
|ident2|ident3|......))\nDKIM-Signature:(?:[ \t]*[^= \;]+=[^= 
\;]+\;(?:\r\n)?)+?[ \t]*([di]=\@?(?&IDENTITY10))\;=>
the_wanted_negative_score - e.g. -10
(?(DEFINE)(?<IDENTITY20>the_wanted_identity
|ident5|ident6|......))\nDKIM-Signature:(?:[ \t]*[^= \;]+=[^= 
\;]+\;(?:\r\n)?)+?[ \t]*([di]=\@?(?&IDENTITY20))\;=>
the_wanted_negative_score - eg -20
...

CLOSED for me


Thomas



Von:    "K Post" <nntp.p...@gmail.com>
An:     "ASSP development mailing list" <assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net>
Datum:  05.11.2021 20:03
Betreff:        Re: [Assp-test] Another Concept Question: 
DKIMBousScoreList



Having the dkimBonusScoreList would be like applying 
dkimBonusValancePB but ONLY for those that DKIM validate AND are on the 
scorelist.  Here's why I think that would be helpful and what you proposed 
could be problematic.  Essentially: I'm thinking: "look, this organization 
usually sends good stuff, but not always.  They might also have people 
sending non-dkim signed messages through a myriad of channels.  Deal with 
them separately, but if we KNOW it's from them because of their DKIM 
signature, help that message get through with the idea that it'll be 
stored in okmail unless whitelisted through something other than dkim."

> there is already dkimOkValencePB - increase it
But a high percentage of all messages that are received, spam and not, 
have valid signatures.  I don't think we should use that to give a bonus 
regardless of who the signer is.  All gmail messages are signed, almost 
everyting from office365.  Yes, I could do a univieral bonus then reduce 
gmail and onmicroosft.com, but that doesn't get 365 users with their own 
signatures and all of the millions of other domains out there.  

It was one thing when DKIM signing was a new concept and only legit 
businesses signed messages.  Now that most senders are signing, giving  a 
bonus would let an awful lot of spam slip through under the rejection 
scoring threshold. 

>reduce the score for certain domains by blackListedDomains, SenderBase or 
anywhere else - if needed
Senderbase won't work for those using AWS as an example - too many 
spammers use them, so adding to senderbase can't be negated using 
blacklist/bombs, etc because I obviously don't know all of the bad senders 
using AWS.

I could reduce the score based on a BombRe match on squaremktg, but then 
I'm reducing when I haven't validated the signature.  It would probably 
work for this specific example, but it would be generally helpful to be 
able to reduce the score on a message based solely on the signature when 
I'm sure they're actually the sender   Dare I say that I'm in love with 
DKIM? 

Would it be life changing like DoDKIMWLAddresses?  No absolutely not, but 
if it's not a major task to add the functionality, I think there would be 
wide appeal.  

I >>almost<< want to suggest that the dkimBonusValancePB feature be 
removed altogether.  I can't think of a scenario where you'd want to give 
a bonus universally just because a message has a valid signature from 
anyone.  Same thing for the SPF pass bonus and it's default of -10!!!  I'm 
sure there are people using one or both, I just can't think of a 
scenario in which it's a good idea.




On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 10:37 AM Thomas Eckardt <thomas.ecka...@thockar.com
> wrote:
Another useless post about concepts without reading the manual. 

>dkimBonusValancePB 

there is already dkimOkValencePB - increase it 

and 

reduce the score for certain domains by blackListedDomains, SenderBase or 
anywhere else - if needed 

Thomas 





Von:        "K Post" <nntp.p...@gmail.com> 
An:        "ASSP development mailing list" <
assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net> 
Datum:        04.11.2021 22:38 
Betreff:        [Assp-test] Another Concept Question: DKIMBousScoreList 




SUMMARY: Would there be benefit (that wouldn't be terrible to code) in 
adding the ability for use to assign a score to emails that match a list 
of DKIM signature identities?      


The DKIMWLAddress and DKIMNPAddress functionality has been an absolute 
game changer here.  Thank you so much for implementing that (it was my 
idea, but we all know that I could never code such a thing). 

I've combined that functionality with closely monitored SenderBase lists 
to dramatically improve ASSP's accuracy. 

One place where Senderbase shines is it's scoring ability for bulk 
senders.  For example, I can give anything that Senderbase says is coming 
from constant contact's network a -10 score, by adding it into 
whiteSenderBase like 
^constantcontact\.com$=>-10   
I don't want to blindly let through constant contact signed messages, but 
if it's coming from their network, make it a little easier for messages to 
pass through. That's worked well for a long long time. 


Recently, I'm seeing several bulk senders having legitimate messages DKIM 
signed by the bulk sender them, but being sent through Amazon AWS (
amazonses.com) and is classified by senderbase as being Amazon / 
amazonses.com.  There's a lot of volume coming in from amazonses.com, but 
unfortunately, it's a mix of perfectly legitimate messages and others that 
are pure garbage.  So that takes Senderbase off the table.  Coming from 
amazonses shouldn't impact the score either way.  And I can't 
DKIMWLAddress the signature, then bad stuff would absolutely get through. 

An example is Square, the credit card processor and software company.  
They send mail, DKIM signed @squaremktg.com on behalf of clients.  Most 
mail from square is good, but sometimes it gets spammy, just like we see 
with mail from other bulk senders.  Real world, I paid for a car wash 
using their mobile payment platform, I received the receipt and later got 
an email with a promotion from the car wash.  All good.  The provider's 
signature was in DKIMWLAddresses.  Today, I received an advertisement from 
them for what is apparently a "gentleman's club" next door, offering a 
complimentary car wash (I took that literally) for visiting the 
establishment.  The language in that email would have absolutely had it 
rejected if it hadn't been on DKIMWLAddresses.  Worse, it wound up in the 
not-spam corpus. 


So, I'd like for certain DKIM signatures to be able to SCORE.  DKIM 
scoring would help it get through (or make it harder depending on the 
score) without automatically passing it and adding it to the corpus like 
DKIMWLAddresses does.   That would let me give the message a negative 
score based on the DKIM but still let Bayesian/HMM and other features stay 
in play to score the message further. 

Conceptually, I could see this working similarly to senderbase.  There 
would be a default valance like 
dkimBonusValancePB  
set to a default of -25 

Then we'd have a list, maybe called DKIMBousScoreList.  Like 
DKIMWLAddresses, it would match the end of the validated DKIM identity, 
but also accepts a score override: 
(@|.)squaremktg.com    <--- gets the default of -25 
(@|.)someUsuallyOKsigner.com=>-12    <-- gets -12 for a score 
(@|.)prettygood.com=>5                        <--- gets 1/5 of the default 
-25   -25/5 = -5 
(@|.)UsuallyBad.com=>-5                      <-- this isn't a bonus, a 
negative default divided by a negative is a positive.  it will be -25/-5 
or adding 5 to the score   


>From a management standpoint, it would certainly be easier to "just" be 
able to assign an optional 2nd parameter to DKIMWLAddresses that would 
score instead of whitelisting, but I feel like that could be too big of a 
coding project. 

I tried to come up with a way to accomplish the same thing based on DKIM 
signature, but came up very short.  I know I could ignore DKIM and just 
score based on the from line, but I really appreciate the certainty that 
DKIM gives that the message is really from that organization. 

What do you think?  Would a  DKIMBousScoreList feature have universal 
appeal? 

_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test




DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally 
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the 

individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no 
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************

_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test
_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test




DISCLAIMER:
*******************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it may be confidential, legally 
privileged and protected in law and are intended solely for the use of the 

individual to whom it is addressed.
This email was multiple times scanned for viruses. There should be no 
known virus in this email!
*******************************************************


_______________________________________________
Assp-test mailing list
Assp-test@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-test

Reply via email to