On Fri, Sep 1, 2023, at 11:33, Stephen Farrell wrote: > > Hi Bron, > > On 01/09/2023 02:02, Bron Gondwana wrote: > > Fact: recipient spam filter has more information than sender spam filter > > I've no axe to grind here, but wondered - is there e.g. a > peer-reviewed publication that conclusively demonstrates > that?
Probably not, because it's blindingly obvious - as you can see from the raw copy of this very message when your read it. Fastmail's outbound spam scanner doesn't know that you'll receive this message, since the recipient address is "ietf-dkim@ietf.org", and it doesn't know for sure that you're a member of that list. > Not saying that that's necessary, but I wondered. Reason > to ask is that I'm not sure I understand how to compare the > sender's (filter's) information vs. the receiver's in a > partial order. As I see Dave has already replied - there's all the extra headers showing the path it took, and if there were any mailing lists or alias expansions along the way, the receiving system knows the actual recipient mailbox where this may be not known at all by the sending system. Strictly - there's a fact that's known to your system and not to mine. Now - there is a fact known to my system that's not known to yours (my signed-in identity, which isn't br...@fastmailteam.com, and may not appear at all other than an opaque header that other systems can't parse). So that's a fair call, there's asymmetric information both ways. But - spam is in the eyes of the recipient, and for sure your system will have more information about whether you might want an email than my system will. Bron. -- Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd br...@fastmailteam.com
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
