Le mercredi 25 F�vrier 2004 15:55, Paul Murphy a �crit : > Sorry, you're confusing me with the original poster
Exactly ! I think I really need to take these 3 years of vacation I'm late on :D) > - I just did a > sanity check on your post because I didn't recognise the MY_DSL rule > which had been triggered. Yup, I got it from an address picked on this list someday ... > Not sure whether it is legal or not - Well if we come to do it dialectically I am pretty sure Office is illegal :D) > I haven't seen Office 2003 so > far, and since it is free text in a free text header, they could have > put _anything_ there... Can anyone confirm that the Outlook in > Office 2003 does indeed use this header? Agreed, and I read the OP answer too :) Then I added the "Office" to the rule, we'll see if less FP happen... > > My point was that my rules are unchanged, so they didn't pick up that > it came from Outlook. Your system did, so either it works on some > other header to spot Outlook messages, or the rule has been updated > to include this version of the header. Agreed too, I use MD 2.39 on SA 2.60, then where do the diff comes from ??? Newer/other versions at your place ? _______________________________________________ Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.canit.ca MIMEDefang mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
