https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6490
--- Comment #38 from Adam Katz <[email protected]> 2011-05-11 18:49:29 UTC --- (In reply to comment #28) > > I don't see any existing rules that need modifications from this. > > I don't think there would be any. I didn't either, but it didn't hurt to look. I was specifically looking for things that constructed an (invalidly) assumed SPF_NONE by means of negating other SPF rules. (In reply to comment #35) > > I've added the disabled rule for spf_none to v340.pre in trunk. > > You shouldn't add rules, even disabled, to .pre files. > > Add this to a .cf file. I agree with Michael. If we're adding the code, we might as well add the rule. Score it 0.001 or else make it a __RULE, though that would require figuring out how to use it as a dependency. Should be useful as anti-phish. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
