https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6061
--- Comment #5 from AXB <[email protected]> 2009-02-07 03:18:24 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > It's clear what is a valid URL, and the current code is careful to only match > valid URLs in deciding what to extract. How do you define a URL string that is > not a valid URL? borked spam contains http://health.sharpdecimal com for many MUAs http://health.sharpdecimal is a valid URL but it could have been http://health.sharpdecimal-foo etc depending on MUA it will be shown as a URL >I would like to see a specific definition of what these bad > URLs look like and some indication that they are spam signs. whatever is at the end of the URL, smells like a TLD but is not in SA's tld definitions? whould that work? ongoing borked URL spam flood in URIBL.com's spam feeds triggered this request. http://medications.prestigechaste http://health.gloriousnext having the eval method, doesn't mean it has to scored by default, but it would be usefull. like you'd use a uri __URI_IN_MSG /\S/ in a meta. hope this makes it clearer -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
