But that would also prevent MUAs from correct rendering the contents, wouldn't
it?
16.02.09, 10:48, Jeff Chan je...@surbl.org:
On Sunday, February 15, 2009, 11:19:17 PM, Makoev Alan wrote:
So my question is: Is it just due
to developers' time shortage, or there are some reasons for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Makoev Alan wrote:
But that would also prevent MUAs from correct rendering the contents,
wouldn't it?
When has that ever stopped a spammer? ;)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
Here was recently a discussion on charset normalization feature (see e.g.
http://markmail.org/message/hvdtbca6lm5tsjtm?q=list:org.apache.spamassassin.users+date:200901+page=42)
I ran a simple check on results that Encode::Detect::Detector facility yields.
I selected manually a set of 39 spam
On Sunday, February 15, 2009, 11:19:17 PM, Makoev Alan wrote:
So my question is: Is it just due
to developers' time shortage, or there are some reasons for
avoiding using the charset indicated in the header field as a
source charset for normalization?
Perhaps spammers set that field
Here was recently a discussion on charset normalization feature (see e.g.
http://markmail.org/message/hvdtbca6lm5tsjtm?q=list:org.apache.spamassassin.users+date:200901+page=42)
I ran a simple check of results Encode::Detect::Detector facility yields.
I selected manually a set of 39 spam messages
