Benny Pedersen wrote: > Victor Sudakov skrev den 2020-11-04 15:47: > > > 0.0 SPF_FAIL SPF: sender does not match SPF record (fail) > > feel free to add into local.cf > > score SPF_FAIL (5) (5) (5) (5) > > this will add 5 points to default score
Is that sarcasm, Benny? I don't deserve it. An SPF fail is by no means a sure sign of spam. It can be some indicator of spamicity (as I thought), but not a decisive sign thereof. Moreover, after reading other replies in the thread, I am even begining to doubt the wizdom of rejecting hard SPF fails in the MTA (which I do in some installations). > > i just think default score is made for spamass milter users with do rejects > of spam mails, but why not honner spf fail rejections, hmm -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
