On 16 Apr 2006, at 13:26, Andreas Metzler wrote:
running the attached message through spamassassin triggers DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12:
<snip>
Afaict this is caused by the Resent-Date: header that the bts software is adding: -----------------------------------------------------[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp$ grep -v '^Resent-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 02:48:08 -0700' < /tmp/testspamass.stripped.correcttime | nice spamassassin --siteconfigpath=/tmp/empty -t -x -L[...] pts rule name description---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines
<snip>
I think it is ok for spohr to add this header, and the time/date seems to be correct too,
The Date used in the Resent-Date header is not RFC compliant: RFC 2822[1] [section 3.3: Date and Time specification] A date-time specification MUST be semantically valid. That is, the day-of-the-week (if included) MUST be the day implied by the date, the numeric day-of-month MUST be between 1 and the number of days allowed for the specified month (in the specified year), the time-of-day MUST be in the range 00:00:00 through 23:59:60 (the number of seconds allowing for a leap second; see [STD12]), and the zone MUST be within the range -9959 through +9959. Specifically "the zone MUST be within the range -9959 through +9959". It should be: Resent-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 12:33:07 +0000 Making it RFC compliant causes DATE_IN_FUTURE to not be triggered: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ grep Resent-Date testspamass.stripped.correcttime Resent-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 09:48:08 +0000 Resent-Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 02:48:08 -0700[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ nice spamassassin --siteconfigpath=/tmp/empty -t -x -L < testspamass.stripped.correcttime
[..] Content preview: This is a test message. cu andreas [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines
This isn't a problem with SA, it's a bug with the BTS software. 1: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt -- -Jamie L. Penman-Smithson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> t: +44 1273 424795; f: +44 1273 424795 PGP: C0A7 955E EED6 A309 23D7 863B C76A 26A3 F0DC FCA8 never send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
