On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 17:17, Jason White wrote:
> Greetings, all.                                                                 
>   I'm using Spamassassin 2.63, called from procmail.  I recently tried          
> to add my own rules to catch the mangled spellings of [a particular word 
> I can't put here else this won't make it to the list -- ironic].  In 
> this example, the maked word is 'testing'.

Ironic, yep... *sigh*.  

FYI, you also might want to try http://sandgnat.com/cmos and AntiDrug

> header SUBJ_MASKED_WORD Subject =~ 
> /t([^e]stin|e[^s]tin|es[^t]in|est[^i]n|esti[^n])g/i     
> describe SUBJ_MASKED_WORD Subject: contains masked word
> score SUBJ_MASKED_WORD 0.1                                                    

That rule looks good to me; SA definitely supports this.  I'd start
checking other things like is spamd restarted? Does everything --lint
ok?  Are there other rules with similar name? Does the real (not
"testing") rule have a typo?  Does -D report your rules really being
loaded from where you think they are?

Chris Thielen

Easily generate SpamAssassin rules to catch obfuscated spam phrases:

The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
Spamassassin-talk mailing list

Reply via email to