On Sun, 26 Nov 2017 23:54:12 -0500 Bill Cole wrote:
> Any whitelisting in the default ruleset should carry MUCH lower > weight than local explicit whitelisting ... NO sender should get a > default -100 just because we (SA maintainers) think they generally > mean well. This isn't new functionality, there are already such default whitelisting entries based on def_whitelist_from_rcvd def_whitelist_from_spf def_whitelist_from_dkim The proposal is to add extra entries based on def_whitelist_auth, which is a shorthand for separate def_whitelist_from_spf and def_whitelist_from_dkim entries. The current entries are a bit incoherent. The scores are: score USER_IN_DEF_WHITELIST -15.000 (from def_whitelist_from_rcvd) score USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL -7.500 score USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL -7.500 which suggests that a lot of overlap is expected on the latter two. But the great majority of address globs are only for dkim. I think a case can be made for transferring most of the score to a single metarule. And, personally, I think -15 is a bit too much.
