Am 05.10.2014 um 14:17 schrieb David Jones:
On October 4, 2014 6:50:44 PM jdebert <jdeb...@garlic.com> wrote:X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 mailsea.docusign.net JQ9N42F3MTC8^^^^^^^^^^ Never seen this before from sendmail. Bogus DKIM header? Iis it also possible to test for conflicting X- headers?Possible extend dkim plugin to bayes ignore header if not dkim signed, tricky yes, but imho makes senseWhy wouldn't all DKIM headers (X-DKIM above and real ones) be excluded? These DKIM headers by themselves are not a good indicator as they can be forged just like any header that is not generated by the local MTA or a trusted relay. Let the DKIM_VALID_AU rule do it's job
hmm - there are far more DKIM headers in my spam than ham samples 0.000 0 1659 0 non-token data: nspam 0.000 0 1720 0 non-token data: nham cat spam/*.eml | grep "DKIM-Signature" | wc -l 568 cat ham/*.eml | grep "DKIM-Signature" | wc -l 269
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
