DKIM with MailScanner

Arthur Sherman arturs at
Thu Mar 8 17:56:03 CET 2007

> The score warnings you see in your lint now are not related to DKIM. I
> assume when you say that the scores are still showing up as 0 you are
> referring to DKIM (e.g. DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VERIFIED, etc.)

My bad.
I mean that mail comes unscored by MS:
X-CPTeam-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=0,
required 4, autolearn=not spam)

DKIM is unscored too.

> The default rules are something miniscule, like 0.001 and -0.001, just
> so that the rule appears int he report while you figure out what your
> policy should be. Now, it's up to you to decide what your DKIM policy
> shall be.

What config should I alter to definy policy?

> I asked on this list a couple weeks ago with no replies. But, I'm
> finding that entities who may use a DK or DKIM signature are still
> spammy sometimes. Take for example a large mail-order catalogue
> company. Their mail would normally get caught by rules for things like
> image weight, textual intention of trying to sell something, etc. Now,
> you go and reward them heavily for passing a DKIM test and now their
> mail suddenly gets through.
> Personally, I'm not sure I want to be that kind.  On the other hand,
> you could give a hefty penalty for those who have a forged DKIM
> signature, but I haven't seen a forgery attempt with either DK or DKIM
> yet.
> I'm interested in others' opinions on this as well.

Make me think about it again.
Probably the best start is low score, indeed.


Arthur Sherman


More information about the MailScanner mailing list