On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 02:30, Matt Sergeant wrote: > Matthew Cline wrote: > > >One way to get around this would be to rewrite the URI rules so to reduce > >the dependency on the URI starting with "protocol://". Since SA now harvests > >URIs out of the message and hands them to the URI tester as an array of > >strings, this shouldn't generate too many false positives. A relative link > >to an unsub page within an <A> element would still match the rule if the > >"http://"; was removed.
Probably not a great idea -- particularly when the protocol is "mailto", but also I think there is information to be had from the protocol. > >The other way to get around it would be to take the <BASE> URI and prepend > >it to all of the relative URIs before handing them to the tests, but that seems > >to me to be going overboard. > > > Why? That's the solution I'd take... I agree with Matt. The way the uri rules work now, it'd be trivial to just munge the uri strings using the BASE value. C _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
