The new watermarking feature in 4.62 - an unexpected side effect?

Scott Silva ssilva at sgvwater.com
Fri Aug 3 22:16:26 IST 2007


Quentin Campbell spake the following on 8/3/2007 12:47 AM:
> Julian
> 
> Am running 4.62.9-2 on 8 gateways with the new watermarking feature enabled.
> 
> It has given rise to an increase in requests to "whitelist" addresses of messages that are being tagged.
> 
> The messages in question have a blank 'From:' address following the "Our MailScanner believes that the attachment to this message sent to you..." rubric.
> 
> On inspection these messages are almost always 'vacation' or OoO messages. It seems that there are good operational reasons for these sorts of auto responders to set the envelope-sender address to be null. However this causes them to be tagged as spam by MailScanner if watermarking is enabled.
> 
> I don't consider it appropriate to whitelist addresses in this situation but they are 'genuine' messages nonethelees and may well be missed if people are filtering into a 'junk mail' folder on the tag. I can't see a way around this.
> 
> I note, however, that JANET in its latest guidance on avoiding inappropriate e-mail bounces (April 2007) - http://www.ja.net/cert/email/dontbounce.html - deprecate the use of vacation/OoO so perhaps we will see the use of OoO responders reduce in future?   
>    
I have seen some of this with read receipts marked as spam with a 0.0 score,
but am hoping it is from the transition period.. IE -- message went out before
the upgrade, but the receipt came in after. Will keep an eye out.

-- 

MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!



More information about the MailScanner mailing list