FW: *SPAM*RE: Cygwin GDB crashes from cvs - solib

[Dave Korn]

On 11 April 2006 16:13, Christopher Faylor wrote:

> Perhaps I'm missing something but AFAICT this has nothing to do with
> spamassasin on sourceware.  

  Absolutely; it has to do with ezmlm on sourceware.  The SA issue is
elsewhere, but it's a knock-on impact kind of situation.

> It sounds like someone else is flagging messages from gdb 
> as spam because they lack an X-Mailer field.  The headers from the quoted
> example did not look like they came from sourceware.

  The big block of headers from the quoted example did come from sourceware.
The X-Spam-report headers indeed did not.

> I can (and will) stop stripping the x-mailer field but it sure sounds
> like a spamassasin problem to me.  There are enough clues in an ezmlm
> header that it shouldn't be triggered as microsoft spam.

  I think you've misinterpreted this slightly.  There's no "microsoft spam"
signature/detection going on here.  SpamAsssassin is trying to discriminate
between real-ms-outlook-generated-email and
ratware-generated-email-with-badly-forged-ms-headers-to-try-and-make-it-look-r
eal.  Those headers are the only discriminant available to it.  Stripping them
at sourceware removes the discriminant.  Adding new headers does not add a new
discriminant.

  SpamAssassin could of course be taught that if it doesn't find those headers
but it does find ezmlm headers it should assume the headers used to be there,
but then it would swallow any spam that someone sent to an ezmlm list using
the particular ratware in question.  IOW, the presence of ezmlm headers cannot
actually be used to infer the former presence of now-removed
X-Mailer/X-MimeOLE headers.  So it's going to be able to make a more accurate
discrimination if those headers aren't removed.

  Anyway, you already said you're happy to leave the X-Mailer field in, and
that will completely solve the problem to everyone's satisfaction.  Thanks!
 

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....