Re: [Exim] My (wishlist) ultimate spam solution

On Saturday, March 23, 2002, at 01:09 , dman wrote:
> Oh, how about looking at this? Here's a snippet from a piece of spam
> that I received recently :
>
> ~~~~~~~~
> ------=_NextPart_000_00A1_03E45A3E.C8413D83
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
>
> PGh0bWw+DQoNCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1MYW5ndWFnZSIg
> Y29udGVudD0iZW4tdXMiPg0KPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0iR0VORVJBVE9SIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNy
> b3NvZnQgRnJvbnRQYWdlIDUuMCI+DQo8bWV0YSBuYW1lPSJQcm9nSWQiIGNvbnRlbnQ9IkZy
> b250UGFnZS5FZGl0b3IuRG9jdW1lbnQiPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iQ29udGVudC1U
> eXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9d2luZG93cy0xMjUyIj4NCjx0aXRs
> ~~~~~~~~
>
> Here's what it says if I decode the base64 and render the HTML :
>
>

My question is, has anyone ever got any LEGIT email that was base64
encoded like the above? In my life, every piece I've gotten has been
junkmail. I don't need to decode it, just junk it. That is a good test
in my book by itself...

Chad