[Declude.JunkMail] 8 bit encoding

2003-11-27 Thread Scot Desort
I have seen a lot of mail like this one scoring low on Declude: X-F: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 22 06:08:11 2003 Received: from tekes.fi [80.56.186.84] by njaccess.com (SMTPD32-6.06) id A394206D005E; Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:08:04 -0500 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Sybil D. Neely [EMAIL

RE: [Declude.JunkMail] 8 bit encoding

2003-11-27 Thread John Tolmachoff \(Lists\)
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scot Desort Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 8:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Declude.JunkMail] 8 bit encoding I have seen a lot of mail like this one scoring low on Declude: X-F: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 22 06:08:11 2003 Received: from tekes.fi

Re: [Declude.JunkMail] 8 bit encoding

2003-11-27 Thread Matthew Bramble
Scot, The 8 bit encoding doesn't have anything to do with why it passes ANTI-GIBBERISH. It appears that this test got tripped on the ANTI filter because of a qa string (with the space, line 53 of that filter). I believe that 8 bit encoding isn't going to be very safe to filter on, though it