>...
>Paul, the procmail script Loren and I use simply strips it out. I've read
>too many folks on this list talk about scanning outbound for one reason
>or another to figure premarking is a good spam sign.
>
>Of course, there are odd cases to consider.
>
>Suppose somebody honest or at least passing honest scans outbound,
>marks the messages, but sends them anyway premarked as spam. I am
>inclined to be a little obnoxious and believe it. If it marks the
>message as non-spam I'd strip the markup that *I* might mis-sort
>upon, In either case I'd rescan it my self. If either case resulted
>in a spam markup, either from me or the sender, it becomes spam. In
>fact I'd put in a rule looking for an X-Spam sort of header and
>explicitly give a "yes" a healthy big score so that I am sure to believe
>the joker who sent it.
>...
I think, I'm agreeing with both you and Matt. It is not that I'm
refusing mail with markup, only emails which are marked to positively be
spam. Similarly, I don't care about any existing markup that doesn't
indicate spam (or a virus, etc. - since I see a much higher percentage
of viruses claim to have been 'Virus-Scan"'d or something similar). All
I'm refusing is those sites/emails that are already marked (e.g. with a
header "X-Spam-Status: yes" or similar). I think I'm saying that an existing
spam status line is much like SPF, the case you'd like is unreliable, but
the other case is plenty reliable (e.g. SPF failure on a relayed message
is one of the other header checks I'm willing to believe - If you tell me
it already failed - not just "softfail"'d, I'll refuse it).
Now I am pretty sure that my BAYES believes any existing markup is
spammy, but that is probably because more forged markup messages have passed
through my servers than valid ones.
The cases I see getting refused are mainly those from honest sites
who are marking spam as spam, but attempting to deliver it anyway (a valid
policy for some sites); This was something I started doing after getting
quite a few spams from colleges and universities which were already marked
as spam (and yes, they were all getting "caught" by my local SA, but why
even accept them when the MTA can do a "cheap" reject?).
Paul Shupak
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
