Hi,
I received an email with a date header like this:
Date: 27 Aug 09 13:50:20 0100
That header triggered the following rule:
1.7 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822)
That's fair enough, but then a second rule was incorrectly triggered:
2.3 DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more before Received: date
Although the date header was badly formatted, it wasn't actually
incorrect as far as when the message was sent. I don't think the
DATE_IN_PAST rules should fire if the date isn't valid in the first place...
--
Mike Cardwell - IT Consultant and LAMP developer
Cardwell IT Ltd. (UK Reg'd Company #06920226) http://cardwellit.com/
