http://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=5485
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-05 10:14 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> I forgot to comment on that: revert to what? I don't think
> this has changed, at least not within the SA::Plugin::DKIM
> (and I doubt it has changed in Mail::DKIM).
When Jason first pulled the code out of dkim-proxy so that we could use it in SA
as Mail::DKIM the module didn't report "sign some" if there was no record that
actually indicated that. If it had have had its current behaviour I would have
dropped the rule from the plugin from day one.
There's a *huge* difference between *reporting* that a domain signs some and
*treating* a domain as it signs some (the RFC default). IMHO the Mail::DKIM
plugin is taking the RFC way too literally. At a minimum it needs to
distinguish between a published and defaulted sign some policy.
> The DKIM_POLICY_SIGNSOME must not distinguish between a defaulted
> and an explicit 'sign some' policy. If there is a need for such
> a distinction, a new rule with a different name must be devised.
We mustn't do anything. There's nothing wrong with using the rule name
"DKIM_POLICY_SIGNSOME" to indicate that an explicit sign some policy was found.
The rule description can even say, "an explicit DKIM sign some policy was
found".
> This may be harder to implement than it appears, because fetching
> a policy is opaque within a Mail::DKIM perl module, and the
> SA plugin has no direct access to this information.
Yeah, I know, and I really think that this is a short coming of Mail::DKIM.
(In reply to comment #6)
> if you guys both agree that it would make more sense to have those rules
> scored
> 0, I'll +1 ;)
Yeah, I'm +1 on zeroing the score for the rule. As it stands now it's useless.
(added Jason to bug CC list)
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
