Am 08.02.2016 um 11:20 schrieb Axb:
On 02/08/2016 11:11 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:that's for sure not a inline image, besides that the description about gif is wrong --------------050005010207060207070405 Content-Type: image/png; name="scan-eml.png" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="scan-eml.png" iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAmgAAAIQCAIAAAC6/AWyAAAAA3NCSVQICAjb4U/gAAAACXBI WXMAAA7EAAAOxAGVKw4bAAAgAElEQVR4nOzdd1wT5xsA8OdCAgkh7A2ykS04mC5QERy4bcWF C7V11VarVm1ra121dVZx1f2rWrdWrSjuvTeKAiIIyJ45su73x2FEuByJYIH2+X7y+ZC8ecfz vvcmb+5yOYjXr9IAIYQQQurhNHQACCGEUFPCVSeTTCbLzc3Nzy8oKS0Ri8UymQwAuFyuQCAQCommit Modified /sa/trunk/rules/20_imageinfo.cf Committed revision 1729124
thanks!i guess the other both was triggered as meta, that was a mail sent by me yesterday with a URL and "should now work from your IP" followed by a iptables-rule and my normal mail signature and a screenshot attached
DC_IMAGE_SPAM_TEXT Possible Image-only spam with little text DC_IMAGE_SPAM_HTML Possible Image-only spam
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature