SpamAssassin classifies MailScanner reports like SPAM

[John Wilcock]

I get the impression we're talking at cross purposes here. I entirely 
agree that MailScanner should make minimal changes to *original messages*.

But the OP was talking about MailScanner *reports*, which should 
definitely, IMHO, be properly formed (i.e. RFC-compliant) even if the 
original message wasn't.

-- 
John

Le 23/03/2016 à 16:10, Alex Neuman van der Hans a écrit :
> I beg to rediffer. There's a limit to what MailScanner should 
> "sanitize". The less it touches the original message, and the more of 
> it gets delivered, "warts and all", the better - some might think.
>
>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 9:40 AM, John Wilcock <john at tradoc.fr 
>> <mailto:john at tradoc.fr>> wrote:
>>
>> I beg to differ.
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mailscanner.info/pipermail/mailscanner/attachments/20160323/99fd9491/attachment.html>