[Spambayes] Missing HTML payload

Tim Peters tim.one at comcast.net
Mon Mar 3 21:21:17 EST 2003

[Mark Hammond]
> Thanks for the replies!

I guess you didn't get my bill <wink>.

> Interestingly, Outlook shows the text, but IE and Mozilla do not.  All 3
> show the text *after* the unmatched comment, but only Outlook shows the
> comment itself.  I don't want to think about the implications of that
> <wink>.
> I made an alternative patch in that bug I pointed to, which completely
> strips the invalid comment.  From purely an Outlook POV, your patch is
> probably better (as your patch better reflects what we see), but from the
> "correctness" POV, maybe mine is (as it better reflects what most HTML
> clients see)

My belief is that non-spam HTML mail moves in the direction of using HTML
correctly, so that damaged HTML is itself a spam indicator.  Unlike Paul
Graham <wink>, I have sisters, and they love sending HTML mail.  It's fun
for them and they do some beautiful stuff with it.  So, all along, I've been
much less willing to penalize HTML than other projects of this ilk (only
computer geeks have bugs up their butts about using HTML in email).

The flip side is that if damaged HTML is a symptom of spam, damaged HTML
should be penalized, and *not* stripping the damaged stuff will create a
mountain of characteristic clues.  Senders of ham can avoid those penalties
by sending well-formed HTML.

> It does seem that no option is required whatever way we go.

I'd agree even if we didn't have too many options.

More information about the Spambayes mailing list