On 2/24/2021 9:10 AM, Alessio Cecchi wrote:
that match "X-Mailer =~ /q(?!q?mail|\d|[-\w]*=+;)[^u]/i"
AND the body DOESN'T have has Invisible Text Styles AND there is no
In-Reply-To header.
Seems a little excessive to me. Points added for good behavior? Am I
reading that right?
I am a guy that gets befuddled with endless metas. I get a headache;
the same kind I
get when having to (watch|Suffer through) a Gilmore Girls marathon. I'm
really asking.
Perhaps: /q(?!q?mail|bo|\d|[-\w]*=+;)[^u]/i might be appropriate, at
least as an workaround. Or something similar.
Is there a genuine use for CASE-Insensitive rules in a X-Mailer
definition? They don't seem
to switch case very often.
Is "Qboxmail" the problem? Since this is the name of our company are
there any chances to keep it without catching the rule?
Yes, you should change the name of your company! ;)
I see that JH and the SpamAssassin crew will address your problem. In
the meantime, it won't
hurt to add a local rule like:
header MY_XM_RANDOM X-Mailer =~ /Qboxmail Webmail/
score MY_XM_RANDOM -1.154
-- Jared Hall
