On Thu, Jun 10, 2004 at 07:38:39AM +0100, Dimitrios wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 22:21:34 -0700 "Robert Menschel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but your rule hits lots of ham here: > > Indeed, the rule is a bit too general, i think it should restrict the length > of the string first, since almost all the spam ones are the same size > (you may look at the long list of spam UIDL's i posted).
They look (if I've got the ones you mean) the same size as the X-UIDL added by my ISP's POP3 software (and probably most people's POP3 mail) : X-UIDL: ~Zj"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"!7a1!!/\0!! Nick
