Hi Philipp > or why should someone (spammer, other mailserver with outgoing > spamfilter) set this Flag to Yes?
I would not think about the spammers here too much but more about a misconfigured SA on sending side? Or the admin added a fancy rbl list which suddenly stops working and returns a hit for every query for an ip or domain. Have been there, have seen that :-) Thats brings us back to the FP question Just my 5 cents: if someone trusts the spam assessment of a remote system, then one should have the guts to reject straight-out on mta :-) Or else ignore the spam assessment from remote. Cheers tobi Am 27.11.19 um 17:56 schrieb Philipp Ewald: > Hi Tobi, > > we only want to trust "X-Spam-Flag: YES" or why should someone (spammer, > other mailserver with outgoing spamfilter) set this Flag to Yes? > > but like RW wrote: >> If you want to >> match on such a header you need to rewrite it before SA sees it. > > i thought shortcircuit will test before any other tests but header was > remove before shortcircuit :( > I have a lot to learn... > > Thanks for help maybe i try this again... later :-) > > Am 27.11.19 um 17:15 schrieb Tobi <jahli...@gmx.ch>: >> Philipp, >> >> Think you should ask yourself the following question: do I trust the >> spam result from a remote server? If yes then why using a spamassassin >> rule and not straight-out reject such mails on mta (header check)? And >> if you do not trust the remote server then why using its spam decission >> at all? >> >> Cheers >> >> tobi >> >> Am 26.11.19 um 14:06 schrieb Philipp Ewald: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> i want to bypas scanning mail if mail has already X-Spam-Flag: YES set. >>> I found "clear_headers" in >>> "/usr/share/spamassassin/10_default_prefs.cf". >>> >>> how can i override this setting? (include next update) >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Philipp >>> >>> >>> >
