On Tue, 5 Mar 2002, Daniel Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2002 at 01:28:20AM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> > There's some body tests that would also work for the subject, like the
> > CASHCASHCASH test, and I've seen some spam were the tests didn't match the
> > body but would have matched the subject. Would it be worth it to make a
> > body_subject test which would add the subject to the body before running the
> > test? Or should separate subject rules be made for these? Or would it not
> > be worth it, period?
>
> I'd agree with this. Maybe a body/subject test? One that I've seen
> recently was mentioning Viagra in the subject, but only talking about their
> 'online pharmacy' in the body.
What I suggest is that the body stripping code adds the subject header in.
I'll apply this patch if there are no objections:
diff -u -r1.79 PerMsgStatus.pm
--- lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm 5 Mar 2002 17:44:51 -0000
1.79
+++ lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/PerMsgStatus.pm 6 Mar 2002 09:40:12 -0000
@@ -658,7 +658,7 @@
my $bodytext = $self->get_decoded_body_text_array();
- my $text = '';
+ my $text = "Subject: " . $self->get('subject', '') . "\n\n";
my $lastwasmime = 0;
foreach $_ (@{$bodytext}) {
/^SPAM: / and next; # SpamAssassin markup
--
Matt.
<:->get a SMart net</:->
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
