Hi Archie,
Thanks. I'm a long-time customer of Mail Server, back from the old "Pro" days going back maybe 15+ years when I was running it on a Windows 2000 Server! Glad to see you're still making and supporting a great product.
Not sure how other MX servers handle SpamAssassin, but they receive back a modified Body of the message with headers like this:
X-Forwarded-To:
Received: from [174.129.nnn.nnn] by mail.blablah.blah (ArGoSoft Mail Server .NET v.1.1.0.2) with ESMTP (EHLO blahblah.blah)
for <scott@blahblah.blah>; Tue, 14 Aug 2018 13:19:06 -0400
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=5.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20,HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3,
JAM_LONG_LINK,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK,RDNS_DYNAMIC,T_REMOTE_IMAGE
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-Spam-Score: 5.7
X-Spam-Level: *****
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on blahblah
X-Spam-Report: * 0.2 JAM_LONG_LINK BODY: Very long link in mail, possibly filled up with
* random words by bulk mailer * 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included
in message * 0.7 HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_20 BODY: HTML: images with 1600-2000
bytes of words * 2.4 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level
above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK
signature, not necessarily * valid * -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at
least one valid DKIM or DK signature * -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a
valid DKIM or DK signature from author's * domain * 1.7
RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 0.3
HTML_SHORT_LINK_IMG_3 HTML is very short with a linked image * 0.4
RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to internal network by host with *
dynamic-looking rDNS * 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external
image They also allow the Subject to be custom re-written as defined in the SpamAssassin config file.
The headers, subject re-write, threshholds, etc is all configured by the SpamAssassin
local.cf config file.
I would imagine that if ArGo uses the Subject and Body returned from SpamAssassin, then this should work as desired as it would include the X-Spam headers. Maybe if you just use the returned Subject and Headers (not the entire Body) it would be faster and more efficient...
Cheers,
Scott