On 03 Sep 2018, at 10:51, Antony Stone
wrote:
> It still sounds like a strange way of identifying spam to me:
>
> 1. surely there are far stronger indicators in the Received headers and/or
> the
> body itself
>
> 2. people are going to be using glyphs such as this more and more commonly in
On 9/4/2018 10:57 AM, RW wrote:
> My understanding is that for historic reasons there is heavy use of
> 'use byte', so SpamAssassin sees text as a series of bytes in whatever
> character set it's written in. normalize_charset allows text to be
> converted to UTF-8, which makes it easier to match
On Sun, 02 Sep 2018 00:02:45 -0400
Bill Cole wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2018, at 18:22 (-0400), David B Funk wrote:
>
> > On the other-hand, if you want to decode the subject line and then
> > pattern-match against all the possible UTF-8 emojies, you're going
> > to end up with a rather unwieldy rule.
I receive emails containing these emojis in subjects regularly. I often found
them annoying and common in spam and wondered about catching then just as the
original poster requested. But then I looked further and see them often used
in genuine emails also. Famously twitter uses these emojis
On Monday, September 3, 2018, 6:52:25 PM GMT+2, Antony Stone
wrote:
>It still sounds like a strange way of identifying spam to me:
>1. surely there are far stronger indicators in the Received headers and/or the
>body itself
>2. people are going to be using glyphs such as this more and
On Monday 03 September 2018 at 18:40:44, Pedro David Marco wrote:
> On Sunday, September 2, 2018, 6:02:55 AM GMT+2, Bill Cole wrote:
> > SA "header" rules match against decoded headers, not the Base64 or QP
> > encoded text.
>
> Maybe he can try with "rawbody" as the subject is the first
On Sunday, September 2, 2018, 6:02:55 AM GMT+2, Bill Cole
wrote:
>SA "header" rules match against decoded headers, not the Base64 or QP
>encoded text.
Maybe he can try with "rawbody" as the subject is the first line...
Many rules to cover all emojis may be poitnless but covering
On 1 Sep 2018, at 18:22 (-0400), David B Funk wrote:
On the other-hand, if you want to decode the subject line and then
pattern-match against all the possible UTF-8 emojies, you're going to
end up with a rather unwieldy rule.
SA "header" rules match against decoded headers, not the Base64 or
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, David B Funk wrote:
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
This is a subject line:
Re: Habemus APP LG
Do you understand that is not an image (EG jpg, png, or tiff) but a UTF-8
code point ("emoji" character) glyph.
We cannot tell because you haven't provided
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
This is a subject line:
Re: Habemus APP LG
Do you understand that is not an image (EG jpg, png, or tiff) but a UTF-8 code
point ("emoji" character) glyph.
We cannot tell because you haven't provided us with an actual message but I'm
going
On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
This is a subject line:
Re: Habemus APP LG
Please paste the entire raw message, all headers included (with recipient
sanitization if needed) to something like pastebin so that we can see all
of it. The version that your MUA displays to you is
This is a subject line:
Re: Habemus APP LG
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 14:15, Antony Stone
wrote:
> On Saturday 01 September 2018 at 14:09:52, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 09:35, Pedro David Marco wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Saturday, September 1, 2018, 7:02:20 AM GMT+2, Rupert
On Saturday 01 September 2018 at 14:09:52, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 09:35, Pedro David Marco wrote:
> >
> >> On Saturday, September 1, 2018, 7:02:20 AM GMT+2, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
> > >
> > > Do you have an SA rule for it?
> >
> > Do you have any sample, Rupert?
>
> Of
Of course I do.
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 09:35, Pedro David Marco wrote:
> Do you have any sample, Rupert?
>
>>On Saturday, September 1, 2018, 7:02:20 AM GMT+2, Rupert Gallagher
>> wrote:
>>
>>Do you have an SA rule for it?
Do you have any sample, Rupert?
>On Saturday, September 1, 2018, 7:02:20 AM GMT+2, Rupert Gallagher
wrote: > >Do you have an SA rule for it?
Do you have an SA rule for it?
16 matches
Mail list logo
