The spample would never make it to our SA. It would be rejected upstream for at
least two reasons:
> To: undisclosed recipients: ;
The To header is not RFC compliant.The Subject header exceeds the maximum line
length, being another RFC constraints. It is easy to catch spam this way.
On Tue, Fe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ian Zimmerman kirjoitti 7.2.2017 4:46:
> On 2017-02-06 20:06, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
>> > Last couple of weeks I saw some messages whose entire contents is in
>> > the Subject.
>
>> never seen such a monster. likely killed by some other piece in
On 2017-02-06 20:06, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
> > Last couple of weeks I saw some messages whose entire contents is in
> > the Subject.
> never seen such a monster. likely killed by some other piece in the
> puzzle. Throw it up on pastebin?
http://pastebin.com/PYaMcZa7
(I was wrong, the subjec
On 2/6/2017 7:52 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
Last couple of weeks I saw some messages whose entire contents is in the
Subject. They have both a text/plain and text/html part but both are
empty (in the case of html, there is some markup but no character
data). The Subject is maybe 400 or 500 chars
Last couple of weeks I saw some messages whose entire contents is in the
Subject. They have both a text/plain and text/html part but both are
empty (in the case of html, there is some markup but no character
data). The Subject is maybe 400 or 500 chars long.
Needless to say, this is a 100% spam
