FWIW, I noticed some interesting Reply-to: addresses in these.
That combined with a very reasonable looking From:, led me to
believe they were trolls for "I'm so sorry" replies from folks
trying to help the hapless email user who sent an empty email.

That is, an attempt to validate that a human is reading the email.

Re X-UIDL, tho that format is odd, some pop servers put them in
messages in mbox files to avoid having to re-calculate a message
hash.  They can have 'most anything in them.

Check out http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/std/std53.txt p.13.

-sam 

From: Chris Santerre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:56:21 -0500

Somtimes, and this may NOT be one of those times, spammers will send an
empty message. At first I thought this was just their stupidity. But then I
thought about it longer. It could be an attempt to get a few negative AWL
points. 

Just an idea to throw out there.

--Chris "oops I top posted again!" Santerre

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David A. Roth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:36 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [SAtalk] Bug in SA? Anyone else get messages like this?
> 
> 
> I sometimes get a blank message and the entire contents is something 
> like I got today:
> 
>  From  Tue Nov 18 13:48:10 2003
> X-UIDL: (RO"!dA&"!nL3"!4bA"!
> 
> I admit I don't know what a X-UIDL is or how to determine the meaning 
> of this contents of "(RO"!dA&"!nL3"!4bA"!".
> 
> Anyone else get messages like this? Were they spam attempts to start 
> with? Could SA be mangling non-spam mail?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> David


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?  Does it
help you create better code?  SHARE THE LOVE, and help us help
YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Reply via email to