BA> On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:24:51 - Kevin Anthoney
BA> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
BA> > Apologies for top posting, BTW. I'm at work, hence $£@@@#!! Outlook.
http://www.flash.to/oe-quotefix/ >
--
/\___/\ /\___/\
\_@ @_/
I have an older 2.50-CVS build that works pretty well...
Looks like its a 01/12/03 version... if you (Dan Kubilos or anyone) is
interested..
Brian
- Original Message -
From: "Tony Earnshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 1:06 PM
Subject: Re:
Á¤º¸Åë½ÅºÎ ±Ç°í »çÇ׿¡ ÀÇ°Å Á¦¸ñ¿¡
[±¤°í]¶ó°í Ç¥±âÇÑ ±¤°í ¸ÞÀÏÀÔ´Ï´Ù.¼ö½ÅÀ» ¿øÄ¡ ¾ÊÀ¸½Ã¸é
¼ö½Å°ÅºÎ¸¦
´·¯ÁÖ¼¼¿ä
[°úÇÐ] ²ÞÀÇ ¿¡³ÊÁö ¹«ÇÑ µ¿·Â
¹«ÇÑ µ¿·ÂÀº ²ÞÀÇ ¿¡³ÊÁö°¡ ¾Æ´Ò ¼ö ¾ø½À´Ï´Ùȼ® ¿¬·á¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏÁö
¾Ê°í, ¿¬·á°¡¾øÀÌ µ¹¾Æ°¡´Â ¿£ÁøÀÌ ÀÖ´Ù¸é ¿¡³ÊÁö¿¡
´ëÇÑ ¹®Á¦´Â ¸ðµÎ ÇØ°áµÉ ¼ö ÀÖ°ÚÁ
Looking through my caught spam folder I found at least one case
where a base64-encoded message body was scanned for keywords.
Here are some of the results:
SPAM: Content analysis details: (13.70 hits, 5 required)
...
SPAM: NASTY_GIRLS (2.2 points) BODY: Possible porn - Nasty Girls
...
SPAM:
> 1.8. How can I change the way SpamAssassin marks up messages it
> considers to be spam?
I'd love to be able to downgrade the priority of a message by spam
level. It could be a lookup table, or simply a linear relationship
as below. Is there an easy way to implement that into SA ?
limit = 3 -
Adding "in-cest" to the key words used to filter would have stopped this
one, as would "luving."
Kathryn Cramer
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2003 07:23:09 -0300
From: Lana Victorio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd: Luving Parents doing Attractive
You are correct, there's no reason to force it to "yes" unless you know for
sure your DNS server is nearly 100% available.
If you have it forced to "yes" and DNS becomes unavailable it's going to
time out and assume no listing. The problem is that it's going to have to
time out each and every R
