Empty messages

[Marco Supino <ma...@sd.com>]

Hi,

 From time to time , i get empty emails, no body, no headers, no subject 
, no to, only a from header,

Now, although this doesnt count as real spam, as it does not advertise 
anything, its still bothering, in my SpamAssassin i get about 3-4 
points, which is not enoghe to classify as spam,

Is there any rule that can take of this ?

This is the sa header :
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.4 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_HEADERS, 
MISSING_SUBJECT,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_FAIL

Maybe a rule that if MISSING_HEADERS & MISSING_SUBJECTS a score will be 
much higher , is this good ?

Marco.

Re: Empty messages

[Keith Whyte <ke...@media-solutions.ie>]

Marco Supino wrote:

> Hi,
>
> From time to time , i get empty emails, no body, no headers, no 
> subject , no to, only a from header,
>
> Now, although this doesnt count as real spam, as it does not advertise 
> anything, its still bothering, in my SpamAssassin i get about 3-4 
> points, which is not enoghe to classify as spam,
>
> Is there any rule that can take of this ?
>
> This is the sa header :
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.4 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_HEADERS, 
> MISSING_SUBJECT,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_FAIL
>
> Maybe a rule that if MISSING_HEADERS & MISSING_SUBJECTS a score will 
> be much higher , is this good ?
>
> Marco.

you could try
meta LOCAL_PROB_BLANK_MESSAGE MISSING_HEADERS && MISSING_SUBJECT && 
RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET
describe LOCAL_PROB_BLANK_MESSAGE Looks like a blank message
score LOCAL_PROB_BLANK_MESSAGE [whatever you want here]

you might want to add a different or more variations on the RCVD_IN.....


cheers,
Keith.

Re: Empty messages

[Loren Wilton <lw...@earthlink.net>]

Boy, I think we need a FAQ answer to this one.  I think we have something in
the SARE rules, but also:

header  __TO_HEADER_EXISTS  ToCc =~ /./
body  __MSG_BODY_EXISTS   /./
meta  LW_BLANK_MSG  (! __TO_HEADER_EXISTS && ! __MSG_BODY_EXISTS)
score  LW_BLANK_MSG  1


        Loren