On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 9:46 PM Loren Wilton wrote:
>
> If SA sees the message and classifies it as spam, it normally adds (from
> an
> example)
> X-Spam-Flag: YES
> X-Spam-Level:
> X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=8.2 required=5.0
> tests=BAYES_50=0.8,DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
>
> It should be trivial
So the alternative is adding a header and move it to the spam folder
automatically on the basis of the header?
Currently I just want to 'warn' users that the message is possible spam,
they can decide to move such emails automatically to a spam folder by
enabling a sieve rule.
What would be an
On 11/15/22 1:16 PM, Marc wrote:
Hmmm, good point, not really thought about this even. Are email
clients complaining about this?
Few email clients are testing DKIM. Some servers are testing DKIM.
Some systems are mis-treating DKIM failure as something more sever than
the specification
> You might want to point out to them that rewrite_header breaks any DKIM
> signature on mail,
Hmmm, good point, not really thought about this even. Are email clients
complaining about this?
> in addition to cluttering the Subject if
> misclassified mail is part of a conversation.
So the
On 2022-11-15 at 05:04:08 UTC-0500 (Tue, 15 Nov 2022 10:04:08 +)
Marc
is rumored to have said:
> I am having repeated occurances of ***SPAM*** in the subject, maybe it is
> good to stop adding ***SPAM*** if there are already 10 in the subject?
That's an entirely local choice, controlled by
On 2022-11-14 at 16:11:10 UTC-0500 (Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:11:10 -0500)
Kevin A. McGrail
is rumored to have said:
> I have also seen the PayPal ecosystem being abused by bad actors sending
> things like fake invoices. I am also +1 to remove the domain from the dkim
> wl.
Same.
Paypal could fix
>I don't know if that's just a boilerplate message or it actually refers to
>the precise reason why my IPs were added to the PBL.
yes, they are explicitly telling you to use mailserver outside of this
range. If you have own mailserver, you should dedicate IP address for
it, one that won't be
Hi,
>
> >These aren't new netblocks for us from them, but it seems awfully weird
> >that we would be operating on these IPs for 2+ years then all of the
> sudden
> >have them listed like they're dialup IPs.
>
> generic/dialup DNS names can help here. If they aren't dynamically
> allocated, their
Thank you Giovanni, I'll give this rule a try. I think the bigger issue was
that the default welcomelist was shortcircuiting any further rule
evaluation. Now I'm able to score these emails with rules like this one :)
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 2:44 AM wrote:
> On 11/14/22 21:14, Shawn Iverson
Thank you Matus. I was not aware of an unwelcomelist_from_dkim option.
This helps immensely.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 4:35 AM Matus UHLAR - fantomas
wrote:
> On 14.11.22 16:39, Shawn Iverson wrote:
> >Corrected...
> >
> >Default Whitelist Exceptions handling -- SJI 11/14/22
> >shortcircuit
Apache SpamAssassin it's both an API and a program. In my installation, I
do not use it to do any subject modifications and I use a milter called
mime defang to do that using my own logic.
You can also configure spam d/Spam seed not to modify the subject.
If you would like similar headings
>
> When a *user* replies it's not at the beginning
> it's "Re: **spam**"
:) Indeed, and in other languages it is even different, but I think developers
get the point ;)
> >> spamassassin add multiple times '**spam**' to the subject.
> >>
> >> your spamassassin only adds it one time
> >
> > Yes I know, and lazy users do not remove it in replies, that is how
> you get multiple occurances
>
> than it's "Subject: **spam** Re: **spam**" and the only relevant
>
> >>
> >> multiple signs of spam leading to marking a message as spam
> >
> > This is not relevant for the discussion on whether or not to have
> spamassassin add multiple times '**spam**' to the subject.
>
> your spamassassin only adds it one time
Yes I know, and lazy users do not remove it in
>
> Am 15.11.22 um 11:48 schrieb Marc:
> >>
> >> and i told you that it's useful when a message already passed
> multiple
> >> hops which flagged it as spam to outright reject it
> >>
> >> /^Subject: .*\*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\*/
> REJECT
> >> Administrative Prohibition
>
> and i told you that it's useful when a message already passed multiple
> hops which flagged it as spam to outright reject it
>
> /^Subject: .*\*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*\*spam\*\*\*\*\*/ REJECT
> Administrative Prohibition (Subject)
A message is either spam or not, and is marked as
> >
> > I am having repeated occurances of ***SPAM*** in the subject, maybe it
> is good to stop adding ***SPAM*** if there are already 10 in the
> subject?
>
> ask the sending admin why in the world he still continues to blow out
> that crap instead trash it
>
> if there are already two in the
I am having repeated occurances of ***SPAM*** in the subject, maybe it is good
to stop adding ***SPAM*** if there are already 10 in the subject?
On 14.11.22 16:39, Shawn Iverson wrote:
Corrected...
Default Whitelist Exceptions handling -- SJI 11/14/22
shortcircuit USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST off
score USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST 0
score USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 0
header CUSTOM_FROM_PAYPAL From:addr =~ /paypal\.com/
meta
> I'm hoping I can ask this question here. Somehow the PBL considered
> the IP addresses given to us by our ISP (I can share this if needed) as
> ineligible to send email, resulting in any recipient domain that checks
> the PBL to reject our email,
AIUI, PBL is supposed to be for
20 matches
Mail list logo
