On 2022-05-07 16:55, Henrik K wrote:
On Sat, May 07, 2022 at 04:47:37PM +0200, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> So no header would be tokenized by default, unless there is
> "bayes_allow_header From To Received" etc.
yes i belive this is "install and forget", needed good headers dont
change
Who knows what are "good headers"
trusteddomains aka opendkim have a list of required headers to sign, for
bayes we could trust them aswell instad of make a list of onwanted
headers
and if random spammer added headers make
any difference.. all this would require running days of "10-fold cross
validation",
not really did this header pass dkim, that part is not needed for bayes
JM is not around anymore so no one knows what to do with the
Bayes engine..
outsource bayes to dspam ? :=)
> Dunno, it might help or might not. Would the allow list be actually any
> shorter, and would it be maintainable in the long run?
atleast axb list is longer and not dkim signed :)
i dont know if dkim signed headers is what to limit to, but it imho
makes
sense to only bayes based on this headers, and hope emails that is not
dkim
signed dont use other usefull headers for bayes
I don't see why DKIM should be mixed up with Bayes. Anyone can add
DKIM
headers, and making Bayes wait for network lookups is complete waste.
"Good
headers" for Bayes are irrelevant to that..
it was not what i meant with tired it to dkim, only point was use same
headers as dkim to get stable bayes header list
