You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by twofers <tw...@yahoo.com> on 2009/07/27 12:35:11 UTC
Rules
Can someone explain to me why one of the rule sets downloaded using SA-Update could not fire on:
Subject: cenogenetic
and the body having only and nothing else but:
Performing Cunnilringus -- An Art of Pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
I thought a "sex" rule would have fired as well as something for pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
This is pretty basic and straight forward isn't it?
Wes
Re: Rules
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, twofers wrote:
> Can someone explain to me why one of the rule sets downloaded using
> SA-Update could not fire on:
> �Subject: cenogenetic
> �
> and the body having only and nothing else but:
>
> �Performing Cunnilringus -- An Art of Pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
> �
> I thought a "sex" rule would have fired as well as something for
> pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
>
> �This is pretty basic and straight forward isn't it?
It's basic modulo an infinite variety of misspellings. The more open you
are to misspellings, the more likely you'll have FPs.
The URI obfu rules are not yet in the base rule set, you have to add one
of the variants to your local ruleset manually - and, if you're using mine
from the SA sandbox, you have to get the patched ReplaceTags plugin as my
URI obfu rule tickles a bug in Replacetags.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_uri_obfu_ws.cf?view=log
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/lib/Mail/SpamAssassin/Plugin/ReplaceTags.pm?view=log
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real
advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would
take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown
in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws
that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They
disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit
crime. -- Cesare Beccaria, quoted by Thomas Jefferson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
9 days until the 274th anniversary of John Peter Zenger's acquittal
Re: {SPAM?} Rules
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009, Mike Wallace wrote:
> I found the only ruleset that catches this to be:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_uri_obfu_ws.cf?revision=795578
>
> And then only the last two rules fired.
That's old. Lose the ?revision... bit to see the current version.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignorance doesn't make stuff not exist. -- Bucky Katt
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
9 days until the 274th anniversary of John Peter Zenger's acquittal
Re: {SPAM?} Rules
Posted by Mike Wallace <mi...@mlrw.com>.
I found the only ruleset that catches this to be:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_uri_obfu_ws.cf?revision=795578
And then only the last two rules fired.
On Jul 27, 2009, at 6:35 AM, twofers wrote:
>
> This is pretty basic and straight forward isn't it?
>
> Wes
>
>
>
> This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by
> MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: Rules
Posted by RW <rw...@googlemail.com>.
On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 06:28:39 -0700
jd <on...@garlic.com> wrote:
> Neil Schwartzman さんは書きました:
> >
> > This is a tough row to ho, and I've not gone down this road in a
> > while but cunillingus is misspelt, potentially leading to the lack
> > of reaction. By your rules.
>
> What's wrong with "whore"? Why is it "ho" now?
>
> How do you "ho" a row anyways?
>
> Mixed metaphors, no emulsifiers--shaken, not stirred?
Did it not occur to you that "ho" might have been a typo for hoe?
"tough row to hoe" makes perfect sense
Re: Rules
Posted by jd <on...@garlic.com>.
Neil Schwartzman さんは書きました:
>
> This is a tough row to ho, and I've not gone down this road in a while but
> cunillingus is misspelt, potentially leading to the lack of reaction. By
> your rules.
What's wrong with "whore"? Why is it "ho" now?
How do you "ho" a row anyways?
Mixed metaphors, no emulsifiers--shaken, not stirred?
--
jd
superbly inextraordinaire
residing somewhere
on a planet called Dirt
Re: Rules
Posted by Neil Schwartzman <ne...@returnpath.net>.
On 27/07/09 6:35 AM, "twofers" <tw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Performing Cunnilringus -- An Art of Pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
>
> I thought a "sex" rule would have fired as well as something for
> pleasure.www.onlyviagra net
>
> This is pretty basic and straight forward isn't it?
This is a tough row to ho, and I've not gone down this road in a while but
cunillingus is misspelt, potentially leading to the lack of reaction. By
your rules.
--
Neil Schwartzman
Director, Accreditation Security & Standards
Certified | Safelist
Return Path Inc.
0142002038
The opinions contained herein are my personal stance and may not reflect the
viewpoint of Return Path Inc.