http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3530
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-16 13:39 ------- Yes, I can see that my proposal is flawed in this respect. I wonder if it's a good thing to have ALL_TRUSTED trigger when we haven't been able to parse any of the Received lines. It just seems to me to be an unsafe assumption. How about the following: ALL_TRUSTED is flagged where (num_received_untrusted == 0 && num_received_trusted > 0). Maybe that would better cover the cases that I see, where ALL_TRUSTED is triggered only because SA isn't able to parse any of the headers at all. Maybe it would also be good to add the corner case where SA is called and there just aren't any Received lines at all, for whatever reason. If you agree that SA should be able to parse headers that a respectable MTA would add, then this might be a solution to the issue: i.e that I'm seeing a fair amount of spam coming through where ALL_TRUSTED is flagged when it really shouldn't be. What do you think? Cheers, Al. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
