Jeff Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > SpamCop got fooled by this URI obfuscation, so I wrote them about > it. Would someone please feed it through SA to see if it handles > it correctly:
It doesn't matter because the message had a score of 19. In 2.64, it had a score of 11. With network tests, the score was 27 including URIBL_SBL, URIBL_SC_SURBL, and URIBL_WS_SURBL. In 2.64, the score was 15. That must burn. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan ApacheCon! 13-17 November (3 SpamAssassin http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/ http://www.apachecon.com/ sessions & more)
