https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6918

Henrik Krohns <h...@hege.li> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |h...@hege.li

--- Comment #1 from Henrik Krohns <h...@hege.li> ---
Based on this, I've cleaned up a basic version and the parser should be quite
robust now. Committing to get it out of my queue, and perhaps get some
developing going.

Sending        MANIFEST
Sending        UPGRADE
Adding         lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/AuthRes.pm
Sending        t/all_modules.t
Adding         t/authres.t
Adding         t/data/nice/authres
Transmitting file data ......done
Committing transaction...
Committed revision 1846123.

There's only these options for now:
authres_networks
authres_ignored_authserv
authres_trusted_authserv

Honestly I'm not sure what we should do with it. It doesn't help "reducing"
SPF/DKIM lookups, since atleast opendkim/opendmarc create quite simple
Authentication-Results headers. How exactly are we going to replicate all these
possibly useful rules, when we have some opendkim response of "dkim=pass,fail"
without details?

full     DKIM_SIGNED         eval:check_dkim_signed()
full     DKIM_VALID          eval:check_dkim_valid()
full     DKIM_VALID_AU               eval:check_dkim_valid_author_sig()
full     DKIM_VALID_EF               eval:check_dkim_valid_envelopefrom()
full     __DKIM_DEPENDABLE   eval:check_dkim_dependable()
header   DKIM_ADSP_NXDOMAIN  eval:check_dkim_adsp('N')
header   DKIM_ADSP_DISCARD   eval:check_dkim_adsp('D')
header   DKIM_ADSP_ALL               eval:check_dkim_adsp('A')
header   DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_LOW        eval:check_dkim_adsp('1')
header   DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED        eval:check_dkim_adsp('2')
header   DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_HIGH       eval:check_dkim_adsp('3')
full   DKIM_VERIFIED         eval:check_dkim_valid()
header DKIM_POLICY_TESTING   eval:check_dkim_testing()
header DKIM_POLICY_SIGNSOME  eval:check_dkim_signsome()
header DKIM_POLICY_SIGNALL   eval:check_dkim_signall()

Same with SPF. Atleast opendmarc's inbuilt SPF check doesn't report NEUTRAL let
alone some HELO stuff? Dunno if pypolicyd-spf / spf-engine gives anything
useful.

header   SPF_PASS     eval:check_for_spf_pass()
header   SPF_NEUTRAL  eval:check_for_spf_neutral()
header   SPF_FAIL     eval:check_for_spf_fail()
header   SPF_SOFTFAIL eval:check_for_spf_softfail()
header   SPF_HELO_PASS                eval:check_for_spf_helo_pass()
header   SPF_HELO_NEUTRAL     eval:check_for_spf_helo_neutral()
header   SPF_HELO_FAIL                eval:check_for_spf_helo_fail()
header   SPF_HELO_SOFTFAIL    eval:check_for_spf_helo_softfail()
header   SPF_NONE             eval:check_for_spf_none()
header   SPF_HELO_NONE                eval:check_for_spf_helo_none()

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to