https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7888
--- Comment #10 from RW <rwmailli...@googlemail.com> --- (In reply to John Hardin from comment #7) > (In reply to RW from comment #5) > > 3 points does seem a bit extreme for a tracker. > > That's based on such headers appearing in very little ham in our corpus. If > the bulk mailer doing this was a widely-used legitimate service I'd expect > to see more hammy instances of it. The scored rule does have exclusions for > signs in the ham we do have, The only exclusion is "&& !__HAVE_BOUNCE_RELAYS". __HAVE_BOUNCE_RELAYS is test for whether any bounce relays are configured in the VBounce plug. In most set-ups it's unconditionally false. > That is historically the > kind of tactic used by spammers to avoid static pattern and checksum > detection tools and to pollute spam signature databases, That's more to do with the body. I don't think there's anything of that sort that would be affected by non-standard headers. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
