Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >> > as far as I know, linkedin mail comes from linkedin domains, and >> > has valid DKIM sigs. >> >> Yep, I'm pretty certain of that too. I think I have a rule that >> scores on coming from linkedin, but without verified dkim signature. > > now the question is, if we know it's an linkedin invitation, if we > need to verify DKIM at all ;) > >> mouss wrote: >> > the sample posted by Michelle came to her via a debian list. debian >> > lists are open (no subscription required) and thus attract a lot of >> > spam. > > On 13.12.10 08:17, Per Jessen wrote: >> And whilst invitations such as those broadcasted are annoying, >> they're not _really_ spam, are they? > > they are UBE, I'm not sure if that means spam to you...
Well, only when they're actually sent in bulk, so _that_ (the frequency) is what needs to be looked at. Probably not a job for spamassassin, I think eg. postfix has an inbound rate limiting mechanism. /Per Jessen, Zürich
