Jason Haar skrev den 2013-06-17 08:51:
?? SA scores hardfails as 0.0 due to the high positive rate.
Therefore
blocking on SPF hardfails must lead to a high FP rate too? If your
organization is willing to live with valid email being bounced, fine
-
but I'm going to listen to our SA overlords on this one...
scores in spamassassin is based on corpus of ham, and spam, and corpus
with spf-fail does not exists, you can reject them in mta stage, and if
wanted one can score it whatever one like in spamassassin
i dont see a problem there, other then users does not manage user_prefs
self :=)
meta SPF_FAIL (3)
will dynamicly add 3 points to the scores of SPF_FAIL
(...or the SA score is incorrect of course. This thread is a bit of a
challange - here we have an example of SA saying one thing, and
everyone
else [well, 3 people ;)] saying "block hardfails" on the other. One
must
be right and the other wrong...?)
is you sure you are really checking envelope_from in sa ?, it will be a
big mistake to check from: are you trusted_networks/internal_networks
setup as it should ?
--
senders that put my email into body content will deliver it to my own
trashcan, so if you like to get reply, dont do it
