Karsten Bräckelmann a écrit : > On Sat, 2009-03-28 at 17:20 -0700, jdpnh wrote: >> For a long time I have been reviewing the header/source of spam that I >> received in my inbox. The version/release of SpamAssassin was old - at >> least 10 releases. I pointed this out to the customer service people and >> tech support folks at my ISP - NO RESPONSE. I followed thru with a letter >> to the prez of the company. >> >> All of a sudden the header/source reflected the current release of >> SpamAssassin. >> >> The service people said that they have always been up to date with the >> current release/version - but they had forgotten to do something that it >> would be reflected in the header/source. I'm a tech and really question >> this response. > > While it does sound strange and questionable -- there's pretty much no > way to confirm it's legitimacy or your suspicion. Even less so, without > the actual headers, which at least give some hint about how SA is > integrated in the mail flow. > > No matter how dumb, of course a later hop can rewrite the SA version > header, if inserted (by SA rather than a glue) in the first place at > all. Also, the headers could at least give a hint about the legitimacy > of the claim of a second hop. >
and in any case, if the results are satisfactory (high spam hit rate, extremely low FP rate), then there is nothing more to ask for! > [snip]
