e.JunkMail] Bah, puny spammer!
> Paul, those last 3 tests are our in-house tests that may or may not be
> suitable for anyone else.
>
> The first of the three is an IPFILE test that contains our banned IPs.
> We put them here instead of IMail because we like the logging of the
> ma
> Paul, those last 3 tests are our in-house tests that may or may not be
> suitable for anyone else.
>
> The first of the three is an IPFILE test that contains our banned IPs. We
> put them here instead of IMail because we like the logging of the
> mail-handling decisions to all be in Declude's lo
>> DSBL:6 SPAMCOP:10 BADHEADERS:6 HELOBOGUS:6 REVDNS:4 ROUTING:8 IPNOTINMX:2
>> NOLEGITCONTENT:2 COUNTRY:10 COMMENTS:153 SNIFFER:7 FIVETENSRC:5
>> EASYNET-DNSBL:7 EASYNET-DYNA:6 EASYNET-PROXIES:5 BH-CNKR:10 SORBS-HTTP:7
>> PSBL:5 CBL:5 GIBBERISHBODY:3 VERISCAM:7 BENTALLIPBL:7 BENTALLSPAMHINT:22
>>
> DSBL:6 SPAMCOP:10 BADHEADERS:6 HELOBOGUS:6 REVDNS:4 ROUTING:8 IPNOTINMX:2
> NOLEGITCONTENT:2 COUNTRY:10 COMMENTS:153 SNIFFER:7 FIVETENSRC:5
> EASYNET-DNSBL:7 EASYNET-DYNA:6 EASYNET-PROXIES:5 BH-CNKR:10 SORBS-HTTP:7
> PSBL:5 CBL:5 GIBBERISHBODY:3 VERISCAM:7 BENTALLIPBL:7 BENTALLSPAMHINT:22
> BENTA
That is funny - it goes to show that the more they try to hide,
the more obvious they become. Most of the spam that makes it
through my filters are perfectly legitimate looking e-mail, which
I have to manually add to the kill list.
Congrats - I think this is the highest score I've ever seen.
