On Fri, 27 May 2005, Loren Wilton wrote:
Yes:
http://ereayfcoqcyr.orgivfhniwthpifecjpedsoh%2Epictilpict4.com/
What you have wrong is a clever hack url that ends in a slash and confuses
SA so that it doens't run the URI tests. There is a patch in 3.1, and I
think it may also be in the
On Friday, May 27, 2005, 2:41:50 PM, Jason Bennett wrote:
Can anyone help me out with the attached message? To me this is obvious
spam, but I don't know why it got through. I have my spamassassin score
set to 5, but when I run spamassassin -D on this, I only get a couple
points. I'm
Subject: Re: [SPAM-TAG] Spam
On Friday, May 27, 2005, 2:41:50 PM, Jason Bennett wrote:
Can anyone help me out with the attached message? To me this is
obvious
spam, but I don't know why it got through. I have my spamassassin
score
set to 5, but when I run spamassassin -D on this, I only get
Subject: Re: [SPAM-TAG] Spam
Hmm, then I must have something wrong because I have the URIDNSBL
plugin
installed and my network tests are active (not using -L on command
line)
and amavisd-new has $SALocalTestsOnly = 0;
When I run this email against commandline spamassassin, I get this
(can
Bug 4337.
Loren
