RE: Re[2]: [SAtalk] spam funny

2003-07-28 Thread Kai MacTane
At 7/28/03 06:30 AM , Chris Santerre wrote: Yeah, I had some reports that these rules would hit a few things. The only way I see to counter it, is with some negative rules. This was the best way I found to grab the random characters. For instance a negative Ezra rule :) What about placing \b before

RE: Re[2]: [SAtalk] spam funny

2003-07-28 Thread Chris Santerre
Yeah, I had some reports that these rules would hit a few things. The only way I see to counter it, is with some negative rules. This was the best way I found to grab the random characters. For instance a negative Ezra rule :) There is more tweaking I would like to do. Like letters by themselves t

Re: Re[2]: [SAtalk] spam funny

2003-07-27 Thread Justin Mason
Bob Menschel writes: >AL> Hmm, I understand the idea now. I will argue about positive score >AL> for unknown signatures, but negative score for signatures in the >AL> my ~/.gnupg is good > >I'd like to see the ability to run such tests. And following SA >practices, each would be a test with its ow