On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 08:59:42AM +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On 2019-12-03 20:15, RW wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:05:10 -0500
> > Mark London wrote:
> >
> >> It seems to me that the rule for detecting a BITCOIN in an email, is
> >> incorrect. See below:
> >>
> >> body __BITCOIN_ID /\b(
On 2019-12-03 20:15, RW wrote:
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:05:10 -0500
Mark London wrote:
It seems to me that the rule for detecting a BITCOIN in an email, is
incorrect. See below:
body __BITCOIN_ID /\b(?
It doesn't, but spammers have started splitting them up to evade
detections.
if clients be
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 11:27:11 -0800 (PST)
John Hardin wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2019, Mark London wrote:
>
> > It seems to me that the rule for detecting a BITCOIN in an email,
> > is incorrect. See below:
> >
> > body __BITCOIN_ID /\b(? >
> > Why is there a \s in this rule?I didn't think that a
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019, Mark London wrote:
It seems to me that the rule for detecting a BITCOIN in an email, is
incorrect. See below:
body __BITCOIN_ID /\b(?Why is there a \s in this rule?I didn't think that a BITCOIN id has a
space.
Recent obfuscation seen in RL extortion spams.
This ru
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:05:10 -0500
Mark London wrote:
> It seems to me that the rule for detecting a BITCOIN in an email, is
> incorrect. See below:
>
> body __BITCOIN_ID /\b(?
> Why is there a \s in this rule?I didn't think that a BITCOIN id
> has a space.
It doesn't, but spammers have s
