[Spambayes] An alternate use
Sat Nov 2 14:14:56 2002
>>> In the case of adding headers, we'll want to avoid collisions with
>>> personal use of spambayes, too. I suggest tagging the
>>> X-Spambayes-Disposition header (or whatever we call it) with some
>>> identifier for which classifier generated the rating, so that
>>> multiple X-Spambayes-Disposition lines are distinguishable.
>>> Something like:
>>> X-Spambayes-Disposition: Spam by firstname.lastname@example.org
>>> X-Spambayes-Disposition: Unsure by email@example.com
>>> Personal classifiers could leave off the 'by' section.
>>> Heck, make it so that X-Spambayes-Disposition lines are turned into
>>> words similar to the mailer lines, and then personal classifiers can
>>> use the judgements of list classifiers as clues.
>> Easy to spoof, and I'm sure spammers would pick up on that quickly.
Alex> Yes, it would be easy to spoof, unless compared with routing
Alex> information... but doing that sort of comparison is beyond the
Alex> sorting rule capabilities of something like Outlook (and Outlook
Alex> is sadly one of the best GUI tools in that arena). I'm not even
Alex> sure procmail is up to the task without help from a custom
I was using a spoof-proof mechanism from procmail before I disabled
SpamAssassin. I inserted my own header using formail:
* ! ^X-SA-Host:
| spamc | $FORMAIL -a "X-SA-Host: `hostname --fqdn`"
which says, "if there is no X-SA-Host header present, run spamc, add a
header and include the fully qualified hostname". If an X-SA-Host header is
present it tells me spamc had already been run on this message (I was
running SA on two different machines at the time). That way I wasn't
relying on SA's own headers to decide whether or not to run it.