Hello,
I noticed that pure existence of DKIM signature can push score under zero:
DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
...so the cumulative score is -0.2.
I'm aware that we don't have many rules with negative scores, but multiple
scores for single valid DKIM sinature should not be redundant.
do you people modify scores of these rules?
I would turn both off, but DKIM_VALID is used in some meta rules...
score DKIM_VALID -0.001
score DKIM_VALID_EF -0.001
I have also tuned tflags, for sure:
tflags DKIM_VALID noautolearn net nice
tflags DKIM_VALID_EF noautolearn net nice
BTW, looking at metas in 72_active.cf:
meta XPRIO __XPRIO_MINFP && !DKIM_SIGNED && !__DKIM_DEPENDABLE && !DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU && !RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
meta XPRIO __XPRIO_MINFP && !DKIM_SIGNED && !__DKIM_DEPENDABLE && !DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU && !RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE && !SPF_PASS
!DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU is redundant and !DKIM_VALID_AU should be enough
meta __HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST_MINFP HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST && !__HAS_SENDER && !__THREADED && !__HAS_THREAD_INDEX && !ALL_TRUSTED && !__NOT_SPOOFED && !__HDRS_LCASE_KNOWN && !DKIM_VALID
meta __NOT_SPOOFED DKIM_VALID || !__LAST_EXTERNAL_RELAY_NO_AUTH || ALL_TRUSTED # yes DKIM, no SPF
meta __NOT_SPOOFED SPF_PASS || DKIM_VALID || !__LAST_EXTERNAL_RELAY_NO_AUTH || ALL_TRUSTED # yes DKIM, yes SPF
shouldn't these contain DKIM_VALID_AU instead?
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
A day without sunshine is like, night.
I noticed that pure existence of DKIM signature can push score under zero:
DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
...so the cumulative score is -0.2.
I'm aware that we don't have many rules with negative scores, but multiple
scores for single valid DKIM sinature should not be redundant.
do you people modify scores of these rules?
I would turn both off, but DKIM_VALID is used in some meta rules...
score DKIM_VALID -0.001
score DKIM_VALID_EF -0.001
I have also tuned tflags, for sure:
tflags DKIM_VALID noautolearn net nice
tflags DKIM_VALID_EF noautolearn net nice
BTW, looking at metas in 72_active.cf:
meta XPRIO __XPRIO_MINFP && !DKIM_SIGNED && !__DKIM_DEPENDABLE && !DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU && !RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE
meta XPRIO __XPRIO_MINFP && !DKIM_SIGNED && !__DKIM_DEPENDABLE && !DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU && !RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE && !SPF_PASS
!DKIM_VALID && !DKIM_VALID_AU is redundant and !DKIM_VALID_AU should be enough
meta __HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST_MINFP HTML_FONT_LOW_CONTRAST && !__HAS_SENDER && !__THREADED && !__HAS_THREAD_INDEX && !ALL_TRUSTED && !__NOT_SPOOFED && !__HDRS_LCASE_KNOWN && !DKIM_VALID
meta __NOT_SPOOFED DKIM_VALID || !__LAST_EXTERNAL_RELAY_NO_AUTH || ALL_TRUSTED # yes DKIM, no SPF
meta __NOT_SPOOFED SPF_PASS || DKIM_VALID || !__LAST_EXTERNAL_RELAY_NO_AUTH || ALL_TRUSTED # yes DKIM, yes SPF
shouldn't these contain DKIM_VALID_AU instead?
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
A day without sunshine is like, night.