-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 11:59:57AM -0800, Justin Mason wrote: > > The issue here is -- should mass-check be de-encapsulating this mail? > > It wasn't encapped by *your* SpamAssassin installation. hmm. > > I think so, yes. I was originally going to say no, but there's no > difference between those mails and, say, an encapsulated mail someone > sends you to include for testing. Hmmm... well, in this case, we have a spam that really was sent from a (subverted) trusted host, and travelled entirely through trusted networks to get to the scanner. In that case I think that's not a misfire -- T_ALL_TRUSTED is doing the right thing. thoughts? - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAYfDWQTcbUG5Y7woRAq7YAJ0bu3J1NDMT7IvtKe/rS9+m5x/98gCffgcA VhYV58Oe7lVo2ftaqPqLRZc= =b+f3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
