I love documentation :-)
--
Kevin A. McGrail
VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:15 AM Dave Jones <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 9/23/18 8:31 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > On 9/23/2018 9:04 AM, Henrik Krohns wrote:
> >> I'm curious, are there guidelines on what can be added here?  How are
> these
> >> lists generated?  Who verifies and checks that old domains don't age
> and go
> >> to some spammers etc?  Most of the listed stuff seems pretty pointless
> for
> >> general population.  Paypal and other _globally_ known services make
> sense.
> >>
> >> Should we encourage committers to add lists of say local banks and
> >> government institutions?  I would have plenty, but I don't know if it's
> >> SpamAssassins purpose to be a global reputation service with all the
> >> maintenance work it requires.
> >
> > I would say it's valuable and to add it.  People can always choose not
> > to use our rulesets.
> >
>
> I have an automated method to find low-scoring trusted senders from a
> highly tuned SA instance.  If these entries cause any problems, users
> can report it to the mailing list and they will be removed.  So far
> there has been one entry reported that was too risky for the general
> population and it was reported and removed.  Otherwise, I have feedback
> that it has helped improve FPs.
>
> Keep in mind that these entries are usually subdomains that will not be
> user/human mailboxes that can be compromised.  These entries are
> verified to be system-generated and have other rule hits making them
> trustworthy senders that honor opt-out requests without
> harvesting/validating the email addresses and handle abuse reports of
> their rogue customers.
>
> My goal was to create low/zero risk entries that the mail filtering
> industry can see that promotes good SPF, DKIM, and DMARC settings to
> raise awareness all around the Internet.
>
> Another purpose of these entries is to allow local meta rules of certain
> email content to add points to block junk senders while allowing through
> those senders in this list that are known to be good and honor opt-out
> requests.
>
> Many of these entries are vetted by private RBLs and DBLs which
> indirectly helps those SA installations that aren't able to subscribe to
> those RBLs and DBLs or fine tune their SA rules and settings.
>
> I proposed the idea on the mailing list a couple of years ago about
> having a centralized clearinghouse of known good senders but no one
> stepped up with any ideas.  Paul Stead's dkimwl.org is the closest thing
> to this that I have found and I think this has been added to 3.4.2
> commented out so some may enable it but most won't.
>
> I have local whitelist_auth entries that are several times longer than
> what I am putting into SA with zero customer complaints and I am
> filtering for about 90,000 mailboxes.  I know there are larger SA
> environments out there but we all can't publish our local (secret) meta
> rules without the spammers abusing them.  However, we can publish these
> safe senders in the SA ruleset to promote good sending to get on the list.
>
> If we want to document these guidelines for how these entries are
> vetted, I will be glad to do that and welcome others to help contribute
> to the entries to get input from all around the world since everyone has
> different mail flow seeing different trustworthy senders.
>
> Dave
>

Reply via email to