Am Tue, 28 Jun 2016 15:57:39 -0700 schrieb Hal Murray <hmur...@megapathdsl.net>:
> > > There is currently no way to deliver spam to abuse@<google hosted > > domain> > > Google isn't the only problem. There are lots of outfits that do > content filtering on their abuse mailbox. > > It seem reasonable to reject mail from IP Addresses on black lists, > but rejecting spam reports because they look like spam seems silly. > What did you expect them to look like? > > Is that mentioned in any BCP? Do any spam-filtering examples process > abuse@ correctly? Sure, using MIMEDefang, we have this code snipplet that affects all our hosted email domains: # ACCEPT any Emails to Postmaster or Abuse Address if ((lc($user) eq "abuse") or (lc($user) eq "postmaster") or (lc($user) eq "spam") or (lc($user) eq "ham")) { md_syslog('warning',"Mail to special recipient $user hardcoded whitelisting"); $vars->{imp_sa} = "ACCEPT"; $vars->{imp_va} = "ACCEPT"; SA = Spam Action VA = Virus Action Overriding the recipient's settings and spam filter threshold. As 'spam' and 'ham' are also used to report spam or false positives, we also whitelist those recipients. I'm pretty sure each ISP could implement such rules on their spam filters. You could also easily match the MIME-Type message/feedback-report and give some 'ham' score to that rule in SpamAssassin and probably any other Spamfilter. -BenoƮt Panizzon- -- I m p r o W a r e A G - Leiter Commerce Kunden ______________________________________________________ Zurlindenstrasse 29 Tel +41 61 826 93 00 CH-4133 Pratteln Fax +41 61 826 93 01 Schweiz Web http://www.imp.ch ______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://chilli.nosignal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mailop