lto:jonas_li...@frukt.org]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2009 1:34 PM
> > To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> > Subject: Plugin extracting text from docs (was: new spam using large
> > images)
> >
> > Jason Haar wrote:
> >
> > > Speaking of image/
24, 2009 1:34 PM
> To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
> Subject: Plugin extracting text from docs (was: new spam using large
> images)
>
> Jason Haar wrote:
>
> > Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going
> on
> > to standardize this so t
> Jason Haar wrote:
>
>> Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going on
>> to standardize this so that the textual output of such attachments could
>> be fed back into SA?
On 24.06.09 19:33, Jonas Eckerman wrote:
> Just as a note:
>
> I'm currently working on a modular plug
Jason Haar wrote:
Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going on
to standardize this so that the textual output of such attachments could
be fed back into SA?
Just as a note:
I'm currently working on a modular plugin for extracting text and add it
to SA message parts.
On 19 Jun, 2009, at 14:38 , Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 13:57 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
On 19 Jun, 2009, at 06:12 , Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
420K in size - standard configuration of SA wouldn't have even
run over
this
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 13:57 -0600, LuKreme wrote:
> On 19 Jun, 2009, at 06:12 , Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
> >> I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
> >>
> >> 420K in size - standard configuration of SA wouldn't have even run over
> >> this message. [...]
> >
> > SA would have scann
On 19 Jun, 2009, at 06:12 , Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 13:04 +1200, Jason Haar wrote:
Hi there, just a FYI
I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
420K in size - standard configuration of SA wouldn't have even run
over
this message. [...]
SA would have sc
Once you have a part you can use the documented methods in
Message::Node to access data (see "perldoc
Mail::SpamAssassin::Message::Node"). You will probably want
$p->decode() which returns a decoded (base64, quoted-printable) string
of the part contents.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Rosenbau
> From: felic...@kluge.net On Behalf Of Theo Van Dinter
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Jason Haar
> wrote:
> > Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going
> on
> > to standardize this so that the textual output of such attachments
> could
> > be fed back into SA?
>
>
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Charles Gregory wrote:
> H. Big question for developers: Does the performance 'burden' of a large
> e-mail come from the 'reading' of that mail into spamassassin and initial
> processing? Or is the 'cost' of a large message only 'paid' when SA attempts
> to run
On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Jason Haar wrote:
Hi there, just a FYI
I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
420K in size...
H. Big question for developers: Does the performance 'burden' of a
large e-mail come from the 'reading' of that mail into spamassassin and
initial processing? Or
On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 13:04 +1200, Jason Haar wrote:
> Hi there, just a FYI
>
> I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
>
> 420K in size - standard configuration of SA wouldn't have even run over
> this message. [...]
SA would have scanned it by default just fine. The default size li
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:04 AM, Jason Haar wrote:
> Speaking of image/rtf/word attachment spam; is there any work going on
> to standardize this so that the textual output of such attachments could
> be fed back into SA?
That functionality already exists (has for almost 3 years, actually),
but as
Hi there, just a FYI
I just received this: http://pastebin.com/m54006b68
420K in size - standard configuration of SA wouldn't have even run over
this message. Also the inline image is too large for FuzzyOCR to trigger
- I would guess FuzzyOCR has the (screen) size limit as a mechanism to
reduce F
14 matches
Mail list logo
