On Tuesday, October 19, 2004, 11:29:17 PM, Loren Wilton wrote: > Some of the SARE rules should handle that sort of spam. SURBL would > probably have caught the sender.
> Loren wealthproductmaker.com is on SURBL lists WS and JP. The message would have been tagged based on that domain in message body URIs. (I assume that's what Loren meant and not "sender", since SURBLs are not intended to be used on headers.) This is also (annoyingly) indicated in the headers of Wolfgang's message, since ASF sees fit to process the SA mailing list messages using SpamAssassin, which of course is an absurd policy: > X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=10.0 > tests=NO_REAL_NAME,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_WS_SURBL Looks like the domain also resolves to a name server in sbl.spamhaus.org, which means SpamAssassin 3.0 would also tag it with uridnsbl in the rule called URIBL_SBL. Wolfgang, if you use SpamAssassin 3.0, it will catch these. Jeff C. -- Jeff Chan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.surbl.org/
