On 2022-11-15 at 21:45:52 UTC-0500 (Tue, 15 Nov 2022 18:45:52 -0800) Loren Wilton <lwil...@earthlink.net> is rumored to have said:
>> So the alternative is adding a header and move it to the spam folder >> automatically on the basis of the header? >> >> Currently I just want to 'warn' users that the message is possible spam, >> they can decide to move such emails automatically to a spam folder by >> enabling a sieve rule. >> What would be an alternative method to keep such functionality without >> altering the subject? > > If SA sees the message and classifies it as spam, it normally adds (from an > example) > X-Spam-Flag: YES > X-Spam-Level: ******** > X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=8.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50=0.8,DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, > > It should be trivial to look for the "X-Spam-Flag: YES" line. Calling the addition of those headers "normal" is a possibly a bit misleading. Such configuration is *common* but is an entirely local choice. There are 4 'add_header' directives in the default prefs distributed in the rules package. However, many sites use configurations that DO NOT add any headers or 'glue' that ignores the message modifications and may or may not add similar headers (e.g. milters that embed SA rather than use a separate spamc.) -- Bill Cole b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org (AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses) Not Currently Available For Hire
