Hello Loren, Stuart,
Monday, December 6, 2004, 9:27:52 PM, you wrote:
LW> Most of the empty spams also lack a To: address, although
LW> they may have a From. I've found that checking for missing body,
LW> missing subject, and missing To: is pretty accurate.
LW> One could probably argue that a m
Most of the empty spams also lack a To: address, although they may have a From.
I've found that checking for missing body, missing subject, and missing To: is
pretty accurate.
One could probably argue that a missing To: all by itself was reason to toss
the mail, but I haven't tried a mass-test
I get a lot of messages that are completely blank - no subject, no body.
I want to create a rule to match these messages. I started with this:
rawbody __HAS_BODY /\S/
meta LOCAL_EMPTY_MESSAGE (!__HAS_SUBJECT && !__HAS_BODY)
(although I think the __HAS_SUBJECT is redundant)
The problem is that
