Alex, (sorry for my previous post, sent prematurely)
> Then shouldn't it just be eliminated as a rule entirely? There are > also rules that apparently depend on it: No, the DKIM_VERIFIED (or rather: DKIM_VALID, as it is now called) (with a near-zero score) is valuable for two reasons: in combination with other rules adds flexibility to whitelisting-type of rules, and provides a quick-glance information when checking a log file. > It looks like perhaps it's there for legacy reasons? From 25_dkim.cf: > # old, declared for compatibility with pre-3.3, should have scores 0 > full DKIM_VERIFIED eval:check_dkim_valid() > tflags DKIM_VERIFIED net nice It acquired a more appropriately named alias DKIM_VALID, with the same meaning. Newer rules use the new name. The old one still works, so old rules are not broken by this renaming. > > I think you want > > whitelist_from_dkim *@bertolini-sales.com auth.ccsend.com > > Yes, that made it work as expected. My example was from the amavisd > docs. Sometimes it has the server name afterwards, and sometimes it > doesn't: > > whitelist_from_dkim *@ebay.com > whitelist_from_dkim *@* paypal.com > > It sounds like it's just a way to provide more fine-grained control? Yes. It is all documented in the Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DKIM man page. Mark
