Re: Nested yahoo spam

2005-06-26 Thread wolfgang
In an older episode (Sunday 26 June 2005 14:23), Loren Wilton wrote: > At a guess, these would be rawbody rules on 3.0+. On 2.6x many times you > can't get to the intervening headers, but if you can, it is usually a 'full' > rule. Test result: using debian's SA 3.0.4-2, neither rawbody nor body c

Re: Nested yahoo spam

2005-06-26 Thread Loren Wilton
At a guess, these would be rawbody rules on 3.0+. On 2.6x many times you can't get to the intervening headers, but if you can, it is usually a 'full' rule. Since rawbody rules are single line you should be able to safely search for something like rawbody FOO/^Note:\swhatever/ Loren