On Wed, 30 Jan 2019, Olivier Coutu wrote:
meta FROM_IN_TO_AND_SUBJ (__TO_EQ_FROM && __SUBJ_HAS_FROM_1)
header __SUBJ_HAS_FROM_1 ALL =~
/\nFrom:\s+(?:[^\n<]{0,80}<)?([^\n\s>]+)>?\n(?:[^\n]{1,100}\n)*Subject:\s+[^\n]{0,100}\1[>,\s\n]/ism
If the from and the to are identical and the subject is empty, this rule
hits, e.g.
From: custo...@example.com
Subject:
To: "Scan PC" <custo...@example.com>
Since there is no restriction for \n in the \s+ after the subject, the /to/
in the next line is matched. An easy fix would be to change \s+ by [ \t]+ or
something similar. The rule could also be cancelled by __SUBJECT_EMPTY
Thanks for the report, I will fix that tonight.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhar...@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhar...@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So Microsoft's invented the ASCII equivalent to ugly ink spots that
appear on your letter when your pen is malfunctioning.
-- Greg Andrews, about Microsoft's way to encode apostrophes
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2 days until the 16th anniversary of the loss of STS-107 Columbia
