On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 10:51:11AM +0000, Koralatov wrote: > * John Long wrote on 2014-12-19 08:18 +0000: > >>Many MTAs will add one if it's not present (in Postfix, this is > >>determined by $always_add_missing_headers). > > > >I understand that but these are spammers who seem to be stupid and are > >trying to obfuscate themselves at the same time. This little trick > >only makes it easier since I wouldn't expect legitimate email to > >arrive with no message-id. > > Sadly that isn't always the case --- there are a couple of people with > whom I work whose phones don't include a Message-ID header when sending > e-mail. They're both using some kind of Android phone, and Runbox as > their mail provider.
Sounds like they're probably worth killfiling ;-) In all seriousness I don't get spam from a huge number of sources so as I get one I keep an eye out and if it happens a few times I deal with each offender individually the easiest way I know how, email id, message-id etc. To this point it's manageable. > Using limit with Will's `!~h message-id' command > on the mailbox I store their mail in returned only their e-mail. > > As such, I'd test it on your mail archives before using it as a spam > filter, because you might also get false-positives. The nice thing about Mutt is the stuff still shows up in the inbox but darkened (with my color scheme anyway). I always have a chance to look at it before I delete it. /jl -- ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) Powered by Lemote Fuloong against HTML e-mail X Loongson MIPS and OpenBSD and proprietary / \ http://www.mutt.org attachments / \ Code Blue or Go Home! Encrypted email preferred PGP Key 2048R/DA65BC04
