[I suggest a new rule]
> Here's a quick and dirty attempt:
>
> header TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPART To =~ /\"?(\w+)\"?\s+<\1\@[^<>]+>/i
> describe TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPART Real name in "To:" equals local part
> score TO_REALNAME_EQ_LOCALPART 2.5
[Craig responds]
> Sounds like a good rule -- even people like me who use their name as email
> address probably won't have many people using "Craig"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; if they're going to go to the trouble of setting
> the real name, they'll now what my last name is.
OK, what next? Is that regex good enough? I doubt it -- I cobbled it
together off-the-top-of-my-head, and consulted only the copy of RFC 822
which I carry around in my brain (not entirely infallible). Do you want
me to take a crack at honing the rule, so eg. something more appropriate
than \w+ is used, or so it doesn't match when there are mismatched
quotes? Or do you want to take over from here?
I'm not really clear on how strict SA's regexes should be -- ie. is the
goal to follow the grammar in the RFC, or to just do a good enough job
that most spam is caught?
Greg
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
