[Rspamd-Users] Now: spf & reject forged From: headers (Was: local.d/actions.conf adding rules )

[Sophie Loewenthal]

> On 15 May 2019, at 10:20 pm, I wrote something :
> Hi guys,
> 
> A while back I had a rule that rejected failed SPFs in emails.
> 
> # cat actions.conf
> rules{
> SJL_SPF-FAIL-REJECT { 
>        action = "reject"; 
>        expression = "R_SPF_FAIL"; 
>        message = "Rejected SPF-FAIL"; } 
> }
> 
> I just put it back in, and got this:
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) lua; lua_cfg_transform.lua:287: unknown element in actions section: SJL_SPF-FAIL-REJECT
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) lua; lua_cfg_transform.lua:160: group excessqp has no symbols
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) lua; lua_cfg_transform.lua:160: group excessb64 has no symbols
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) cfg; rspamd_rcl_maybe_apply_lua_transform: configuration has been transformed in Lua
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) <9jyjtj>; cfg; rspamd_config_action_from_ucl: action SJL_SPF-FAIL-REJECT has no threshold being set and it is not a no threshold action
> 2019-05-15 20:15:14 #29823(main) <9jyjtj>; cfg; rspamd_config_read: rcl parse error: invalid action definition for: 'SJL_SPF-FAIL-REJECT'
> 
> I also tried this with just,
> SJL_SPF-FAIL-REJECT { 
>        action = "reject"; 
>        expression = "R_SPF_FAIL"; 
>        message = "Rejected SPF-FAIL"; } 
> and had similar errors.
> What is the right way to add this, these days?
> 
> Best wishes.
> 
> P.S The original question this came from is on old rspamd google groups https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rspamd/oyGbTQpp_pk

Hi,  I ditched this approach above and went for metrics.conf
group "spf" { symbol "R_SPF_FAIL" { weight = 6.0; description = "SPF verification failed"; } }
Rspamd didn't seem to complain, but forged From headers still make it though so this rule do not score any messages. Is this rule still valid and should it have worked and if not why not?
Cheers all.