Chris Santerre said: > Anywho, I have been checking lots of these against RBLs and many show up > in > sorbes and such. Spam didn't come from these places, only images hosted > there. I was wondering if possibly in the future, SA could check the URI > links against RBLs? They all seem to be using the same servers to host now > after they are blacklisted. This way they still get use out of the hosted > boxes. Just a thought.
A while back there was a patch posted to SA-Talk that did just that for Debian's SpamAssassin 2.60 package. I was running it until I upgraded to SA 2.61. It worked quite well although the scores that were included with the patch were pretty aggressive. Ref: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general/33572 Based on my personal results, I think this would be worthwhile merging into the official SA distribution. I wonder if Florian would be willing to submit a bug report to bugzilla with his patch against 2.70 CVS (cc'ed, but it looks like his email address may have expired). -- Chris Thielen Easily generate SpamAssassin rules to catch obfuscated spam phrases (0BFU$C/\TED SPA/\/\ P|-|[EMAIL PROTECTED]) : http://www.sandgnat.com/cmos/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
