Martin Gregorie schrieb:
>> ... go to WWW EVIL ORG for new meds ...
>>
>> and
>>
>> ... digging through the WWW HE SAW this link ...
>>
> Both IMO should be caught and given a positive score. I've never seen
> legitimate mail containing URLs written this way.
Maybe I was not clear: The last one is NOT an url. Do you really want to
use the whole bunch of SA's URI tests against sentences like:
... looking at the www peter got an impression of ...
(-> www.peter.got?)
And again: What about urls that do not start with www? Which characters
should be examined for obfuscation ([ ,;:|?!=])? How many of them in
sequence should be examined? If SA tries to de-obfuscate each possible
triplet, you won't have enough computing power and you will be bombarded
with false-positives. If you really want that, you can write your own
rules but this is (by far) too dangerous for the standard SA
distribution (imo).
