Hi, > > I have an email that matched KAM_SENDGRID because it also matched > > SPF_HELO_NONE, despite it apparently being a legitimate sendgrid > > email. This is from SA trunk.
I only meant it as a reference for the version of SA (and SPF.pm) that's being used, in case it was necessary. > > X-Envelope-From: > > <bounces+3940809-b10a-43194=hotel.example....@em8909.cookspest.com> > > > > I'm noticing what I think are a lot of false positives for this rule. > > In what way is this a false positive? Looks like a correct positive to > me. Because it was a legitimate email with an invoice from a pest control company to their customer. > If you disagree with the scoring or purpose of that rule, you are free > to reduce the score locally or discuss it with KAM. He's a very Nope, just trying to understand. > KAM's > QA is a 100% black box but he makes changes fast when needed. Yes, and just wanted to be sure that wasn't necessary here. > > Perhaps it's because Return-Path is null? > > Return-Path: <> > > That's a different problem, apparently with your MTA->SA glue. The fact > that something added a non-null "X-Envelope-From:" header and something > (else?) added a null "Return-Path:" header indicates fundamental > breakage. Whether SA is seeing that or if it is a delivery artifact is > unclear. Perhaps this is a problem with my amavis configuration? It appears all quarantined messages have a null Return-Path header.
