Jo Rhett wrote: > I'm sorry, apparently I wasn't technical enough. Yes, I can read. > And > I already opened up and looked at the rule, and I can't figure out why > it failed. Please skip the duh answers.
There's enough people on here that need that level of answer, you can't really blame me for starting there. Rule #1 of troubleshooting -- start with the simplest explanation, and work your way up. > And god no, I never use 5 as the tag level. Hell, I run 2.9 on a > number of my accounts... Don't try to make something that is an > adjustable user policy into a Don't Change This. I wasn't. I run 3.5 myself. Just pointing out that the rules are optimized for 5, and your "false positive" scored 4-ish. > That's not the RCVD_CITIBNK rule I'm using. Apologies. I should have made sure I was looking at the most updated version.
