Received: from CM02.outbound.mail (mailer4.monteraymedia.com [66.63.189.28]
(may be forged)) by mail.camerontech.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id
iB75ihQg015990 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 6 Dec 2004
23:44:44 -0600
Received: by CM02.outbound.mail (PowerMTA(TM) v2.0r6) id h4mn9a050u48; Mon,
11 Jun 2001 22:47:13 -0700 (envelope-from <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
Remember "all trusted" really means "no untrusted links in the recieved headers
that we were able to parse".
If SA can't parse a received header line, it simply tosses it and continues
with the next one. This may not be the best plan, and there are various bugs
open about the exact meaning and handling of all-trusted.
The second header shown above doesn't have any ip addresses in it, so it would
get tossed (or maybe considered as local, I'm not positive).
That leaves the first header, which at a glance would seem to not come from
your network, so shouldn't be trusted. I'm guessing that there is something
about the format of this header that SA doesn't much care for, so it ended up
tossing it as unreadable.
That would leave you with no received headers, which would mean that the mail
had been sent locally, so was obviously trusted. :-(
There was a patch in the works a month or so back to somehow take account of
unparsable headers in determining all-trusted. I was out of town for most of
November and lost track of the status of that change. Assuming that the
problem here is the first received header was unparsable, that patch may help
matters if it is approved.
Loren
