On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Andreas Metzler wrote: > On 2017-07-13 Alexander Wirt <formo...@debian.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Marc Haber wrote: > > >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 08:47:56AM +0200, Alexander Wirt wrote: > >>> I am talking about the report: > >>> X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER SECTION, Improper folded header field made up > >>> entirely of whitespace (char 20 hex): X-Spam_report: ...T_ADDRESS@@ > >>> for details. Content previ[...] > > >> Just making sure, this is a report generated by Amavis on > >> lists.debian.org, not on the bug reporter's exim, right? > > No. Its generated by the spamd exim is calling. No amavis involved. It just > > catches the broken header on arrival. > > What we are trying to point out is that exim does not add an > "X-Amavis-Alert" header. Is your issue about a broken "X-Amavis-Alert" > header or is it about an X-Spam_report that amavis does not like? It is about Exim/Spamassassin adding non rfc conform headers.
"No amavis involved. It just catches the broken header on arrival." Please forget you ever heard amavis. Alex
