X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.1 required=5.0
tests=FAKE_HELO_SHAW_CA,HTML_30_40,
HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG,MIME_HTML_ONLY autolearn=no
version=2.63
Here's a question for you. How'd your copy of SA 2.63 end up with a score of 4.1? Have you modified any scores?
Grepping through 50_scores.cf for a stock copy of 2.63 I get these scores None of which total to anything which might round to 4.1.
0.298 0.904 2.800 0.585 (score FAKE_HELO_SHAW_CA) 0.160 0.001 0.100 0.100 (score HTML_MESSAGE) 1.107 1.717 1.259 1.184 (score HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG) 0.666 0.100 0.248 0.320 (score MIME_HTML_ONLY) 0.837 0.809 0.919 0 (score HTML_30_40) --------------------------------------------------- 3.062 3.53 5.326 2.845 (totals)
Other than this minor point, I'd agree with the others that fixing the FAKE_HELO match would be worthwhile. The HTML rule matches aren't nearly so bad on their own.
I am really surprised that the Sun software is unable to do things correctly.
I'm in general the opposite. I'm really surprised when Sun software can do things correctly.
I'm extraordinarily unimpressed with IPlanet, which caused difficulty with one of my home ISPs that used IPlanet at the time. Their mail servers had trouble exchanging mail due to lack of RFC compliance at the SMTP layer (since fixed). It could have been the ISPs fault, or Sun's who knows, but the problem was something very fundamental like lack of generating HELO's prior to issuing mail. I was quite shocked the MTA could even be configured that way without great effort on the part of the ISP.
