> > The thing is, if a spammer is claiming to be an actual person, but
> > isn't, then that person who's being impersonated almost certainly has
> > legal recourse for damages from the spammer. If I were a spammer, I'd
> > avoid doing this, just in case I used someone's address who cared enough
> > to come after me.
This has legal precedent, BTW. The spammer's behaviour is illegal
in pretty much any jurisdiction.
> If this sort of thing is a trend (and I haven't seen one yet, but who knows)
> it's also an argument in favor of PGP signatures for those who are well-known
> enough to be targets of spammers.
> Doesn't SA already have a negative score for valid PGP signatures? Or is it
> just a simple regexp check for something resembling one?
Er, the latter ;) If we start seeing faked PGP sigs, we can verify
them from then on.
BTW on a vaguely-related note; I've seen more and more spam coming
in with stuff like
to u.n.s.ub.scr.i.b.e mail ....
So, rather than trying to figure out what the text *really* says, I've
just added a rule which matches -- roughly -- (?:[a-z][^a-z]){3,}.
Catches them nicely! ;)
--j.
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
