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

Scott Silva ssilva at
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) - - 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