[Users] Can the use of SpamAssassin result in filtering rules being bypassed?

[Pierre Fortin]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 16:54:48 -0000 Paul wrote:

>Hello Pierre,
>
>I am not sure that I've followed your description correctly but I can say
>that the SpamAssassin plugin always runs before any filtering rules.

Thanks! Sorry if my message wasn't clear enough; but I now better
understand how SpamAssassin, by running first can obfuscate many other
filter results.  It's easy to follow what we expect from our filters; but
SA can short-circuit those filters...  In my case, I was wanting to simply
delete certain messages; but SA moved them to my SPAM folder before my
filter ever saw them. My desire to not have to deal with these messages
at all was thwarted by SA's action, after which I still had to deal with
them.

>If you want SpamAssassin to run afterwards, then don't use the plugin but
>instead call SpamAssassin from a filtering rule. See
>https://claws-mail.org/faq/index.php/Filtering_and_Processing_of_Messages#How_do_I_configure_a_filter_for_running_SpamAssassin.3F

Thanks for that; though that's why I suggested that SA either should be
available on both ends of filtering via:
  [x] Enable SpamAssassin plugin 
      [ ] before (bypasses filters if msg is moved by SpamAssassin)
      [X] after filtering (called on Filter fall-through)
or not at all.  It's the top-only option that made the filtering bypass
less apparent.  

I'm not filing an enhancement request because this falls into the 'corner
case' category; but may be a seed... :)

>regards
>
>Paul
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>Users at lists.claws-mail.org
>https://lists.claws-mail.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>