http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1375
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-03-02 13:20 ------- I disagree about excluding only empty links. We should exclude anything that is invisible. If there is a way of making a link invisible that doesn't cause it to be excluded, the spammer could include as many of them as needed to cause either a DoS if we looked up all of them, or make it statistically unlikely that we would hit the one spammish one if we used a random sample. Doing a half-way job of implementing this will just cause the spammers to exploit the cases that we don't handle, and we might as well not bother. Isn't there already code to determine if text is invisible so it can be ignored by some tests? Can this be used to test the visiblility of a link? Even if that is true, there is a thornier problem: They can use an image with no text for the link, and we have no way of knowing whether it points to a visible or invisible image. What do we do with a hundred hrefs to innocent places like kai.com with the clickable area an IMG link to a one pixel space gif from some non-spam website mixed with one href to the real spam site with the clickable area an IMG link to a picture that says "click here"? I don't want to be negative or to give the spammers any ideas, but I expect that they would figure this one out on their own. ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
