Odd missing X-Spam-Status: Yes header

Scott Silva ssilva at SGVWATER.COM
Fri Oct 28 00:15:50 IST 2005

    [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-1" character set. ]
    [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set.  ]
    [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ]

Jim Davis spake the following on 10/27/2005 2:21 PM:
> On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Glenn Steen wrote:
>>Why do you rely on procmail handling this?
> Procmail handles all local delivery, and I'm moving from a standalone
> spamd/spamc setup where users do something like
> :0:
> * ^X-Spam-Status: Yes
> spam
> in their .procmailrc files.  By policy, the server just tags; what users
> do with that info is up to them.
> As far as I can tell, that shouldn't be spoofable by a spammer simply
> tacking on a 'X-Spam-Status: No' flag.
Wouldn't it depend on where their spoofed header is in the body of the
message. I think the earlier comment of changing the header to something
more personal,like X-SERVERNAME-Spam-Status:, and fixing that in their


/-----------------------\           |~~\_____/~~\__  |
| MailScanner; The best |___________ \N1____====== )-+
| protection on the net!|                   ~~~|/~~  |
\-----------------------/                      ()

------------------------ MailScanner list ------------------------
To unsubscribe, email jiscmail at jiscmail.ac.uk with the words:
'leave mailscanner' in the body of the email.
Before posting, read the Wiki (http://wiki.mailscanner.info/) and
the archives (http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/mailscanner.html).

Support MailScanner development - buy the book off the website!

More information about the MailScanner mailing list