Peter Bowyer wrote on Fri, 23 Apr 2010 18:23:57 +0100.
> Discarding the countless man-years of effort already expended on this
> topic would seem to be foolish. See Dynastop, Spamhaus PBL, and many
> other projects. They've taken the time to get it right and think of
> all the instances that your simplistic pattern matching falls over on.
1. One will never ever learn much simply by adopting other people's
solutions.
2. Yes the implementation of what I perceived to be Regular Expressions
failed in my Exim 4.63 (no later versions available for my Linux
distribution). Conducting a test in Perl, the same as Martin did,
produces the same non-match so the inevitable question is why did the
same criteria produce a radically different answer in Exim if both are
using the same Regular Expressions ?
3. I prefer to get the filtering working satisfactorily in Exim's ACL
rather than to venture into very heavily RAM dependent (as alleged by
others) Spam Assassin.
4. Yes my pattern matching is indeed 'simplistic'. What can one
realistically expect from a brand new Exim user of just 6 months
experience of Exim who implemented his 'simplistic' solution with just 3
months part-time knowledge ?
5. If anyone can help explain why this gives the wrong result I shall be
grateful.
>> deny message = [C06.5] Msg6 Msg2
>> hosts = ^.*[a].?[d].?[s].?[l]*
It matched 'olga.hinterlands.org'
Regards,
Paul.
--
