John D. Hardin wrote: >On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Philip Prindeville wrote: > > > >>Hmm.... Maybe if I post with a more obvious subject line.... >> >>What is the notation for writing a "whitelist_from" or >>"whitelist_from_rcvd" when the sender is <> ? (As in "MAIL FROM: >><>") >> >> > >Are you sure you want to use that broad a brush? There is a *lot* of >garbage that is sent as faked mailer daemon bounces. > >
Well, yes, especially since the IP address of the sender is reserved for a machine that does ticketing and auto-replies exclusively (I was going to use whitelist_from_rcvd and not just whitelist_from). >When dealing with a known correspondent's brokenness, it's safer to >focus your permissiveness rather tightly. Try a meta rule that matches >a Received: line on a bounce from them, add a rule that ANDs that meta >with the rule that fires on their malformed date, and score it to >cancel out the malformed date score. > > I'm not ready to work that hard... I'd rather catch the broken email, point it out to them, have them fix it, and then remove the whitelisting when they've fixed their agent. -Philip
