Re: SA tags (was: Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam)

2003-01-15 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 02:31:38PM +0100, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > btw: what happens if an incoming mail already contains typical SA > tags, either because the outgoing message was scanned by SA or a > spammer forges those headers? Does SA add its own (double headers), > does it replace these heade

SA tags (was: Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam)

2003-01-15 Thread Kai Schaetzl
Martin Radford wrote on Tue, 14 Jan 2003 23:04:37 + (GMT): > FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA > btw: what happens if an incoming mail already contains typical SA tags, either because the outgoing message was scanned by SA or a spammer forges those headers? Does SA add its own (double headers), does it r

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Martin Radford
At Tue Jan 14 22:34:34 2003, Andrew Joakimsen wrote: > > Also I just had a thought, does SA add any (alot) of points if it detects it > as two mailers (say a spammer trying to get his message past SA)? There's a whole set of rules in the 2.50 CVS version which compare the format of the message-id

RE: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Andrew Joakimsen
y, January 14, 2003 12:31 PM Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 16:08, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > While the Date clearly is a bug in the webmail c

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 16:08, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > While the Date clearly is a bug in the webmail client and should be > > reported there, > > > >> - HTML only message with no text > >> - Outlook-ish headers, but not all

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > While the Date clearly is a bug in the webmail client and should be > reported there, > >> - HTML only message with no text >> - Outlook-ish headers, but not all of them (indicates someone trying >> to look like Outlook ..

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Daniel Quinlan
Daniel Quinlan wrote: >> Read up on the mime_defang option (which will be replaced by the >> report_safe option in 2.50). This really needs to be in the FAQ ... not >> that anyone reads it. Theo Van Dinter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Oh, you mean like > http://spamassassin.taint.org/faq/index

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Theo Van Dinter
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:24:28PM -0800, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > Read up on the mime_defang option (which will be replaced by the > report_safe option in 2.50). This really needs to be in the FAQ ... not > that anyone reads it. Oh, you mean like http://spamassassin.taint.org/faq/index.cgi?req=al

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-14 Thread Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
On Tue, 2003-01-14 at 07:24, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > "Andrew Joakimsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > When forwarding a non-spam message with UebiMiau webmail, Spam Assasin > > thinks it's spam! Anyone have any similar issues or know what I could > > do to fix this? > > Well, that messages *d

Re: [SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-13 Thread Daniel Quinlan
"Andrew Joakimsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When forwarding a non-spam message with UebiMiau webmail, Spam Assasin > thinks it's spam! Anyone have any similar issues or know what I could > do to fix this? Well, that messages *does* trigger a lot of spam rules -- it contains a lot of formatti

[SAtalk] UebiMiau Spam

2003-01-13 Thread Andrew Joakimsen
When forwarding a non-spam message with UebiMiau webmail, Spam Assasin thinks it's spam! Anyone have any similar issues or know what I could do to fix this? Also it seems that SA breaks HTML in email when the message is Spam, is that how it should be or just a slight bug or the result of editing