[X] I agree.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Im Auftrag von Helpdesk > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. September 2002 18:54 > An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Betreff: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] More encoded spam > > > on 9/5/02 9:23 PM, Madscientist wrote: > > > All this is good I guess. Until we come up with some good > examples of > > legitimate messages with text/html base64 then we won't completely > > settle the issue. It does seem that the evidence so far is > strongly in > > favor of a spam/no-spam test for base64 encoded html. > > Any news on this front? > > My subscribers and I are receiving more and more of this type > of spam. Even if there are some legitimate messages of this > type going around, I'd like a Declude test to identify this > type of message. > > I plan on giving messages that fail this future test a weight > of 5 in hopes that when combined with my other tests/weights > it will cause these messages to exceed my automatic delete > weight. If no one finds any legitimate messages of this type, > I would obviously increase the weight of the test but until > then I could at least stop some of these messages. > > Later, > Greg > > --- > [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com. --- [This E-mail was scanned for viruses by Declude Virus (http://www.declude.com)] --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
