Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org>: > > And not necessary. Base64 spam invariably has telltales that Bayesian > > amalysis will pick up in the headers and MIME cruft. A rather large > > percentage of it is either big5 or images. > > I'd be curious to know if that will continue to be true in the future. > At least one of my non-tech friends sends email that's exclusively > HTML (even though the content is very lightly marked-up plain text), > from a hotmail account. Spam could easily have the same origin, but > the HTML contents would be very different. Well, consider. If your friend were to send you base64 mail, it probaby would *not* come from one of the spamhaus addresses in bogofilter's wordlists. The presence of base64 content is neutral. That means that about the only way not decoding it could lead to a false positive is if the headers contained spam-correlated tokens which decoding the body would have countered with words having a higher non-spam loading. -- <a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4