[SAtalk] Suggestion for new rule for spam getting through.

[mark london]

I got the following spam message, which has a low rating.  The 
construction of the To: line is "To: user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"    I've 
seen this in a lot of spam, and can't imagine how a real message sent 
to me would have this form, so I would like to create a test for this 
situation.  Has anyone done this?  Has this ever been discussed? 
Thanks.

Received: from h00e018561833.ne.client2.attbi.com by PSFC.MIT.EDU with SMTP
          for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 2 Oct 2003 3:18:15 -0400
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2003 05:48:18 +0000
From: Stacey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Why not?
To: Mrl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Tania <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Ossie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Message: ok
X-Spam-Level: -0.1 () IN_REP_TO,NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP,REFERENCES
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.31 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang)
I know what you think about this, but I finally got a result!

You know the size really matter and she was fucking happy! My dick was
so big :) hehe
I bought this VRX bottle at
http://211.142.226.167:1794/cgi-bin/vrx.pl?125
Call me today :)

_______________
NetMail v. 018


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk