http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3816
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-10-19 12:53 ------- As a user who was about to report this "bug"... I gotta say that as far as the end user is concerned, just add the damn subject line so I can trash the emails by looking for ****SPAM**** :-) Getting back to the original email of either a blank Subject: line or no Subject: line at all seems rather picuyane to me. In either case, there is no useful subject, and in either case, it's almost-for-sure JUNK that should just be thrown away anyway. Does anybody really care whether it was no subject line at all versus a blank one? It's trash either way. Now all I gotta do is get my web host to upgrade SA and call it done. :-) Actually, I'll just modify my PHP IMAP script that does my custom filtering (post-SA) to catch this one and trash anything with no subject line, but I'll prod him to upgrade anyway, to benefit the other users. Bottom Line: Most mail clients don't have filters flexible enough to parse the raw spam score. Many webhosts allow end users to configure SA to rewrite the Subject based on the score, to allow the end user to decide what is an acceptable level of junk to wade through without losing real email, and giving that flexibility to the end user is, in general, a Good Thing (tm). Thus, the end user is relying on the behaviour that junk email gets the ****SPAM**** marker in the subject line, based on the SA score, in order to configure their filters to throw away the trash. PS I'm looking for a good de-biff function so I can detect intentional mis-spellings of junk words... Considering Soundex and similar functions, as well as simple substitution ciphers comparing to a dictionary of bad words, but open to other suggestions or refinements. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
