Re: Score 0.001
Um, "FORGED_SPF_HELO"? Are you sure this message is from MS?
{^_^}
On 20240512 06:56:59, Thomas Barth wrote:
Am 2024-05-12 12:39, schrieb Greg Troxel:
I would suggest that if Debian is modifying the default config from 5 to
6.31, then probably they should not be doing that.
This is a status of dmarc-report from microsoft today
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.938 tagged_above=2 required=6.31
tests=[ARC_SIGNED=0.001, ARC_VALID=0.001, BASE64_LENGTH_78_79=0.1,
BASE64_LENGTH_79_INF=2.019, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DMARC_PASS=-0.001, FORGED_SPF_HELO=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,
MIME_BASE64_TEXT=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.1, MPART_ALT_DIFF=0.724,
PYZOR_CHECK=1.985, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001,
T_TVD_MIME_NO_HEADERS=0.01]
A strike level of 5 is too low for microsoft mails ;-)
Re: Score 0.001
Thomas Barth skrev den 2024-05-12 15:56: Am 2024-05-12 12:39, schrieb Greg Troxel: I would suggest that if Debian is modifying the default config from 5 to 6.31, then probably they should not be doing that. This is a status of dmarc-report from microsoft today X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.938 tagged_above=2 required=6.31 tests=[ARC_SIGNED=0.001, ARC_VALID=0.001, BASE64_LENGTH_78_79=0.1, BASE64_LENGTH_79_INF=2.019, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DMARC_PASS=-0.001, FORGED_SPF_HELO=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.1, MPART_ALT_DIFF=0.724, PYZOR_CHECK=1.985, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_TVD_MIME_NO_HEADERS=0.01] A strike level of 5 is too low for microsoft mails ;-) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AUTHRES_DKIM_PASS=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, KAM_NUMSUBJECT=0.4, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.1, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-0.2] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no AuthRes is nice :)
Re: Score 0.001
Am 2024-05-12 12:39, schrieb Greg Troxel: I would suggest that if Debian is modifying the default config from 5 to 6.31, then probably they should not be doing that. This is a status of dmarc-report from microsoft today X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.938 tagged_above=2 required=6.31 tests=[ARC_SIGNED=0.001, ARC_VALID=0.001, BASE64_LENGTH_78_79=0.1, BASE64_LENGTH_79_INF=2.019, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DMARC_PASS=-0.001, FORGED_SPF_HELO=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=0.001, MIME_HTML_MOSTLY=0.1, MPART_ALT_DIFF=0.724, PYZOR_CHECK=1.985, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_TVD_MIME_NO_HEADERS=0.01] A strike level of 5 is too low for microsoft mails ;-)
Re: Score 0.001
On 12.05.24 06:39, Greg Troxel wrote: I would suggest that if Debian is modifying the default config from 5 to 6.31, then as it was already said, it's not Debian, it's default score in amavis. Even the original header is in the amavis format: X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.999 tagged_above=2 required=6.31 tests=[DMARC_MISSING=0.001, FSL_BULK_SIG=0.001, Amavis has some more scores than stock SA, of course they can be modified if your scanner is well trained. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Linux - It's now safe to turn on your computer. Linux - Teraz mozete pocitac bez obav zapnut.
Re: Score 0.001
I would suggest that if Debian is modifying the default config from 5 to 6.31, then probably they should not be doing that. as a packager, I fix bugs (and file upstream bug reports), but it's usually linuxy nonportability things that are clearly bugs (test ==, hardcoded lists of accepted operating systems, etc.). This is a difference in judgement. if they are applying a difference in judgement, the package description should disclose this really clearly. Hard to tell what's going on, but this appears to be new to most people here.
Re: Score 0.001
Am 2024-05-12 01:08, schrieb jdow: Methinks this is a perfect example of "one man's spam is another man's ham." Or in my case, "A woman's spam is often a man's ham." I like spam when it's well designed. That's why I no longer reject it on my newly set up mail server. I just want them all to be saved in the junk folder. I sometimes admire the creativity of spammers to attract attention to a ridiculous product :)
