Author: W B Hacker Date: To: exim users Subject: Re: [exim] Header remove before spam check or parse content
inrouter
Drav Sloan wrote: > W B Hacker wrote:
>> Personally, I strip damn near ALL X- headers as a courtesy to our users and
>> their regular correspondents.
>
> I use only X-Spam-Score for this reason. The X-Spam-Report, to me, deserves only
> to live in a log file.
Precisely.
>
>> None of whom have ever been big fans of headers that take up greater screen
>> real-estate - if not also byte-count - than the average message body.
>
> The "average user" I've supported over the years uses a client which doesn't even
> show these headers and is generally unaware that such things exist. It Seems
> pointless to add all these headers if on the whole they are "unseen/unused".
>
Double-edged blade that one. See below.
>> As admins we can too easily forget just which 'communication' is the reason we
>> are here at all.
>>
>> The user's message content. Not our 'handling overhead'.
>
> I've found the X-Spam-Score header useful over the years (especially when trawling
> my own and user submitted 'spam' to add custom rulesets and system filters to
> avoid future spam of this neature from getting through). I've also had users who
> wanted to "filter" at lower scores, and including this header meant they could do
> so in their own exim/procmail/sieve/local email client filters. I think for the few bytes
> it adds it's worth the rewards in the long run.
>
Problem is that an X-Spam (or any other X-) is not one that common MUA display
even in 'intermediate' header detail mode.
And there's the rub: When the user actually DOES want to see it - say becasue
I've stuffed *Suspect* into the Subject: line - they have to click display ALL
headers - at which point some examples scroll clear TF off the bottom of the
viewpane AND off the right edge, which may not even be scrollable in some MUA.
So that drives the next step .. 'view source'... yada, yada.
RPITA
WHEREAS - if we were one and all a bit more economical with the crapola we keep
addng-on, a person could actually work in 'display all' headers all the time and
still have space enough to read the body.
IOW - in trying to be 'helpful' with extra information, we are making it
impractical to actuallt SEE or act-on that information.
Net loss!
> I guess the mileages and policies of various mail systems will vary tho (I've seen
> some that like to add the equivalent of novels to X-headers. These have included
> the infamous long winded X-Spam-Report header, plus ones at banks where mails bodies
> are quoted verbatim in X-Headers :/ )
>
> Regards
>
Lord, a prayer for crop-failure on THAT one! 'Coz those are also the same sort
of misguided folk who love the smell of their own html. Not realizing that even
IF a recipient allows it unconverted (I do not) the chances of their having the
same off-the-wall fonts and not having an over-riding stylesheet to smack some
sense into purple prose on lavender backgrounds are less than unity.
Using a local stylesheet to force white text on a white background with no links
or graphics is a good way to filter out the non-essentials in an html incoming.
Gives you a screen that matches the mind of the sender perfectly.
