Thanks for pointing it out. Sorry did not get it in first point. Changed the regex in the rule to expect the scheme too and now we get the expected hits again. Just one thing. Does this mean that email addresses found in body always have a scheme (mailto://) too?
Thanks for your help and have a good one Am 26.03.19 um 05:56 schrieb Henrik K: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 08:42:50PM +0100, Axb wrote: >> >> seems to me everybody is making an effort in disregarding the fact that the >> URI rule was hitting on a header and imo, that should not happen. >> This makes the whole uri behaviour even more unpredictable. > > As already was established, all body hits are guaranteed to have sceheme > > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7440 > > I see no problem > Am 26.03.19 um 05:56 schrieb Henrik K: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 08:42:50PM +0100, Axb wrote: >> >> seems to me everybody is making an effort in disregarding the fact that the >> URI rule was hitting on a header and imo, that should not happen. >> This makes the whole uri behaviour even more unpredictable. > > As already was established, all body hits are guaranteed to have sceheme > > https://bz.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=7440 > > I see no problem >
