On 2022-11-15 at 15:16:49 UTC-0500 (Tue, 15 Nov 2022 20:16:49 +0000) Marc <m...@f1-outsourcing.eu> is rumored to have said:
>> You might want to point out to them that rewrite_header breaks any DKIM >> signature on mail, > > Hmmm, good point, not really thought about this even. Are email clients > complaining about this? > >> in addition to cluttering the Subject if >> misclassified mail is part of a conversation. > > So the alternative is adding a header and move it to the spam folder > automatically on the basis of the header? Yeah, you CAN do that. I just reject anything deemed spam outright. That way, false positives (which are extremely bad and should not be quiet) are never silent due to my systems' behavior. The sending MTA gets an explicit 5xx reply and should be transmitting that back to the human sender as a DSN, so they can try to fix the problem. Dropping suspected spam into a "spam folder" just gives for wanted mail a new place to die unseen. (That's just my personal opinion, not a policy of the SA PMC, which doesn't take any positions on how individual sites apply SA results.) > Currently I just want to 'warn' users that the message is possible spam, they > can decide to move such emails automatically to a spam folder by enabling a > sieve rule. > What would be an alternative method to keep such functionality without > altering the subject? Use SA's "add_header" feature. It is on by default, but depending on which 'glue' you use to integrate SA and which distribution package you use you may not be seeing the modification by add_header. -- Bill Cole b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses) Not Currently Available For Hire
