On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 06:31:03PM +0100, Rado S wrote: > ... one part being the defensive things listed by Travis, but you > also shouldn't forget that some "outsiders" rate html-ized mails > as spammy, so at least the score increases or in the worst case > it's outright blocked unless white-listed. > ... > (min. 50% of my total spam is html-ized: when I explain this to > my partners, they understand and click their box. I haven't heard > any of them complain about having lost quality of life ;) Yep... spamassassin has this as a test in every install. It may not be weighted enough to force a failure by default, but it does count towards the overall spam score. I'm reading this on a system that doesn't have X11 libraries, so I can't easily view graphics anyway. When I get around to content filtering, I'm going to file those in =.spam automatically. BTW, the bayesian learning page at CRM114 or dspam (I forget) has some interesting facts about HTML keywords. -- Good code works. Great code can't fail. -><- <URL:http://www.subspacefield.org/~travis/> For a good time on my UBE blacklist, email john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpHqSuPIEycU.pgp
Description: PGP signature