Re: body_checks regex explained in detail Re: Inline image spams

On 24 Dec 2006, Darxus-5+gNnNaL/BD/[email protected] wrote:
> 
[snip] 

> Anything you still don't understand?  Anybody see any detail I missed or
> got wrong?
> 

Thanks for the clarification. I do get quite a lot of genuine mail with
attachments which would presumably be rejected by this. Or am I missing
something?

> > 	Content-Type: multipart/related;
> > 
> > is present in all such emails and in no others, including the legitimate
> > attachments I receive. Putting this in procmail has worked 100% so far.
> 
> My concern about this is that I would expect most email clients to go ahead
> and display the image spam just fine if they break standards and skip that
> header.  So you'll filter successfully short term but long term you're just
> encouraging them to violate standards to get around your filter.
> 

I don't suppose many people will be filtering in this way, at least in
the Windows world. Besides, the spammers don't *know* that I'm catching
their stuff so they've no reason to change things.

-- 
Anthony Campbell - ac-MeA/[email protected] 
Microsoft-free zone - Using Linux Gnu-Debian
http://www.acampbell.org.uk (blog, book reviews, 
on-line books and sceptical articles)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV