On 10/20/11 8:24 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
On 10/19/2011 04:43 AM, Mynabbler wrote:
You are kidding, right? 50% of this crap comes from FREEMAIL
addresses, and even more specific: 44% of this crap is delivered by
aol.com. The aol deliveries have about 85% unique from@aol
addresses, so they pretty
On 10/19/2011 04:43 AM, Mynabbler wrote:
You are kidding, right? 50% of this crap comes from FREEMAIL
addresses, and even more specific: 44% of this crap is delivered by
aol.com. The aol deliveries have about 85% unique from@aol
addresses, so they pretty much 'own' aol.
We're writing spam
that. Interestingly enough the
most used subject from valid freemail is Re: and none. I don't see a
problem with being picky about freemail. The only free email provider
succesfully fighting _out_going spam is gmail.com.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Chickenpoxed-subjects
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 04:43:52 -0700 (PDT)
Mynabbler wrote:
RW-15 wrote:
MN As I explained, even if the rule would have fired, it adds a
MN whopping 0.1 score. It only shows teeth when combined with other
MN findings...
RW So, why isn't it worth scoring if it's a useful rule?
Because
this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Chickenpoxed-subjects-tp32644509p32672891.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 01:21:36 -0700 (PDT)
Mynabbler wrote:
Adam Katz wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Adam Katz wrote:
Time for F-U-N
I like DD and rockroll
/var/spool/mail is full
... those examples don't get a hit with the rule I cooked up (since
it needs three different odd
.
As I explained, even if the rule would have fired, it adds a whopping 0.1
score. It only shows teeth when combined with other findings...
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Chickenpoxed-subjects-tp32644509p32677140.html
Sent from the SpamAssassin - Users mailing list
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
Mynabbler wrote:
RW-15 wrote:
It would hit:
Re: Did you pick-up the dry-cleaning?
Nope. Scores just two (one ':' and a '?') and the rule needs three
different odd characters.
OK the font I'm using makes ~ look very like a -, but the point
On 10/15/2011 03:37 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Mynabbler wrote:
Typically the chickenpox rules do not get a lot of love abroad,
since they tend to trip over other languages than English. However,
does someone have an idea how to use the logic in chickenpox for
subjects like
On 10/17/2011 02:29 PM, Adam Katz wrote:
I think this would satisfy the original request:
header __SUBJ_LACKS_WORDS
Subject !~ /(?!^.{0,15}$)(?:^|\s)[a-z]{3,15}(?:\s|$)/
(I have not checked that in, feel free if you like it.)
Okay, that needed a little work (boo to double-negatives).
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Adam Katz wrote:
header __SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT Subject =~
/(?:[-~`!@\#$%^*()_+={}|\\\/?,.:;][a-z][-~`!@\#$%^*()_+={}|\\\/?,.:;\s]|[a-z][~`!@\#$%^*()_+={}|\\\/?,.:;][a-z])/i
How does this differ from a negation, like:
On 10/17/2011 04:36 PM, John Hardin wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Adam Katz wrote:
Time for F-U-N
I like DD and rockroll
/var/spool/mail is full
It must hit more than a specified number of times. __SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT
isn't scored, SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT_FEW and SUBJ_OBFU_PUNCT_MANY are.
Each of my
On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Mynabbler wrote:
Typically the chickenpox rules do not get a lot of love abroad, since they
tend to trip over other languages than English. However, does someone have
an idea how to use the logic in chickenpox for subjects like these:
... or does someone have a decent rule
13 matches
Mail list logo
