...which is probably why it scores 1.9 and not 5+ C
On Tue, 2002-02-05 at 15:42, Daniel Rogers wrote: > On Wed, Feb 06, 2002 at 09:00:23AM +1100, Daniel Pittman wrote: > > I just got a message that hit this test: > > > > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.9 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE version=2.01 > > > > It had a date header that wasn't in the future, though. It was: > > > > Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2001 22:12:20 +1100 > > > > That's a year in the past, not in the future, and it /shouldn't/ be > > impossible to parse... > > I saw a few of these when I was working on something today. > > Looking at the code, SA is comparing the Date: header with the dates in the > Received: headers. If it finds that the Date is more that four days off the > Received, it'll trip this. > > Of course, all that's required is for someone to have their system date set > wrong (which is fairly common). > > Dan. > > _______________________________________________ > Spamassassin-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk > > _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
