On Thu, 17 Dec 2020, @lbutlr wrote:
On 16 Dec 2020, at 23:21, Loren Wilton <lwil...@earthlink.net> wrote:
I just got a batch of spams containing
<span style="display:none">
Interesting. I remember in the early days of html spam there were various rules
to tag messages as spam when they had content that did not display. (Possibly
pre-SpamAssasin or at least pre my use of SpamAssasin).
Such rules are there. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, lots of ham uses
"invisible" text so it's not useful as a spam sign by itself and it's hard
to come up with any useful combination rules.
https://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/?rule=%2Fsty_invis
Perhaps this would be useful if it hits bayes but not hard enough to push
it over the threshold:
meta INVIS_TEXT_BAYES __STY_INVIS && (BAYES_80 || BAYES_95 || BAYES_99 ||
BAYES_999)
N.B.: I just fixed a minor error in __STY_INVIS that made it fail to see
that specific form of "invisible text".
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.org pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Bother," said Pooh as he struggled with /etc/sendmail.cf, "it never
does quite what I want. I wish Christopher Robin was here."
-- Peter da Silva in a.s.r
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
8 days until Christmas
