:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 8:30 PM
To: List Mail User
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: URI Tests and Japanese Chars (solved)
List Mail User wrote:
>>...
>>To: "Daryl C. W. O'Shea&quo
>>[all sipped]
>
>
>Since you mentioned the scores, please note the Bobby Rose, the original
>poster of this issue had modified the score for URIBL_SBL from its
>defaults to 10 ...
>
>I had suggested that he reduce the score (possibly setting it back to
>the defaults)
>
>While it doesn't negate the
List Mail User wrote:
(B>>...
(B>>To: "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
(B>>Cc: List Mail User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(B>> users@spamassassin.apache.org
(B>>Subject: Re: URI Tests and Japanese Chars (
>...
>Subject: RE: URI Tests and Japanese Chars (solved)
>Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:41:03 -0500
>...
>From: "Rose, Bobby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: "List Mail Use
>...
>To: "Daryl C. W. O'Shea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Cc: List Mail User <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: URI Tests and Japanese Chars (solved)
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>F
Justin Mason wrote:
I'd agree with Paul, what's the difference between doing the lookup of
the domain listed in a mailto: link and a http: link -- both of which
are often found in someone's signature?
Eliminating the mailto: domain lookup could lead to spam such as "email
us at [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Thursday, March 17, 2005, 2:25:34 PM, Justin Mason wrote:
> Daryl C. W. O'Shea writes:
>> List Mail User wrote:
>> > Jeff,
>> >
>> > RFC 1630 make pretty clear that a email address in either a "mailto:";
>> > or "cid:"; clause *is* a URI. It does not address whether a bare email
>> >
Rose, Bobby wrote:
But in my test messages the email address wasn't in the form of a URI.
It was just the email address. I even used pine for a test to make sure
it was a gui client doing some reformatting business.
Sorry, I shouldn't have said URI. I had said URI since SpamAssassin
internally a
ould add up the more that person's
email address appears in the email.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 5:26 PM
To: Daryl C. W. O'Shea
Cc: List Mail User; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; users@spamassassin.apache.org
S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daryl C. W. O'Shea writes:
> List Mail User wrote:
> > Jeff,
> >
> > RFC 1630 make pretty clear that a email address in either a "mailto:";
> > or "cid:"; clause *is* a URI. It does not address whether a bare email
> > address
> > would cou
List Mail User wrote:
Jeff,
RFC 1630 make pretty clear that a email address in either a "mailto:";
or "cid:"; clause *is* a URI. It does not address whether a bare email address
would count (it seems that it doesn't fit the RFC definition, but does fit
some other I found by Goggle)
Jeff,
RFC 1630 make pretty clear that a email address in either a "mailto:";
or "cid:"; clause *is* a URI. It does not address whether a bare email address
would count (it seems that it doesn't fit the RFC definition, but does fit
some other I found by Goggle).
I could be
On Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 12:29:41 PM, List User wrote:
(Jeff C wrote:)
>>uridnsbl used in the default rule URIBL_SBL does check domain
>>name servers against SBL, but I'm kind of surprised to hear it
>>triggering on email addresses. It should definitely be
>>checking web
>>sites and the like
t;
>Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 11:14 AM
>Subject: Re: $BFb;[EMAIL PROTECTED](J
>
>***
>
>-=B
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:52 AM
>To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
>Subject: Re: U
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Bobby, could you open a bug in the bugzilla about this? URI rules
should not be checking mailto links.
- --j.
Jeff Chan writes:
> On Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 5:47:40 AM, Bobby Rose wrote:
> > This is an excerpt that I used in trying to track it d
On Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 5:47:40 AM, Bobby Rose wrote:
> This is an excerpt that I used in trying to track it down. No
> real mailto URI unless there is some translation going on with
> email addresses embedded in the body by the email client on send. At
> first, I just thought it might be
11, 2005 11:14 AM
(BSubject: Re: $BFb;[EMAIL PROTECTED](J
(B
(B***
(B
(B-=B
(B
(B
(B-Original Message-
(BFrom: Jeff Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(BSent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:52 AM
(BTo: users@spamassassin.apache.org
(BSubject: Re: URI Tests and Japanese Chars (so
On Wednesday, March 16, 2005, 3:55:52 AM, Bobby Rose wrote:
> I figured out the problem, it' was the an individuals email address in
> the message body (even though not a mailto). Their email domain isn't
> listed at spamhaus.org but it turns out one of their ISPs DNS servers
> are which they ar
I figured out the problem, it' was the an individuals email address in
the message body (even though not a mailto). Their email domain isn't
listed at spamhaus.org but it turns out one of their ISPs DNS servers
are which they are using as secondary. This makes the second time I've
come across t
19 matches
Mail list logo