Hi,
On Sun, 7 Jul 2002 14:52:41 +0200 (CEST), Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
TLS> On Sat, 6 Jul 2002 the voices made Patrice Fournier write:
TLS>
TLS> > body LOCAL_LONG_WORD /[a-zA-Z]{90}/
TLS> > describe LOCAL_LONG_WORD LOCAL: Long random word in body (90
TLS> > chars+) score LOCAL_LONG_WORD 4.8
TLS>
TLS> Why 90? Wouldn't it work better with 50 or 60, so that it catches
TLS> ID-strings;
TLS> or atleast ignore linebreaks and include numbers?! Hmmm... well, I
TLS> guess it could start matching on encoded/asciiarmored messages
TLS> then, but, really, does this one really work well?
I got this one for catching unique IDs:
body BODY_UNIQUE_ID /^\s*\d[0-9A-Z]{5,}-[0-9A-Z-]{12,}\s*$/mi
describe BODY_UNIQUE_ID Contains a unique id
score BODY_UNIQUE_ID 4.0
test BODY_UNIQUE_ID ok 8918mlss4-226dLTK9221guil23
test BODY_UNIQUE_ID ok 3493CJKK3-698AVWv9365bKSJ3-974EHFO6354xl37
test BODY_UNIQUE_ID fail Donau-Dampfschifffahrts-Kapitaen
It works quite well here.
tobias
--
.deSecure Digital Security
www.desecure.de
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
We have stuff for geeks like you.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
