On Sun, 25 May 2003, LuKreme wrote:
L> >
L> > Though I'm not on many lists doing HTML (and I despise HTML emails in
L> > general, though included HTML _code_ is a different matter), the above
L> > rule certainly hasn't yet hammered anything it shouldn't have.
L>
L> Why not test for Content-type? if the message isn't html then the
L> comments are a lot less likely to be spammish, right?
L>
L>
Some html spam is not marked with a content type.
Alan
( Please do not email me AS WELL as replying to the list. Please
address personal email to alan+1@ as lists@ is not read. A
password autoresponder may be invoked if this email is very old. )
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail