Just applied the upgrade last week and saw the notes on Spamhalter & Clamwall.  Look interesting, and I'll take a look at them when I get a chance.

We run a B&B and have a public email address on our web site which draws a lot of spam. I've spent years refining my content control and have an action = delete that eliminates 50-60 percent, 200 or more, a day without my having to further review them. And I use global rules to divert virtually all email with attachments for review before delivery.

It may be one or both would integrate well.

 I was just hoping the "has" issue would be "fixed", (meaning defined as I hoped it would be) in the new release. I tried to use it a lot in combo rules (e.g. contains "insurance" AND has (auto, life, health.....) that kind of thing.  But have had to resort to using more statements using "matches"  since they like to spice things up like "Life Insurance" , "Life-Insurance", "LifeInsurance", etc.  Oh well.

Thanks for the feedback.

Mike

I had come to the conclusion that both "has" and "hasall" would refer to "words" based on a space before and after the character string which is considered to be a word. Then I found 1 instance, (after installing the latest release) where the "word" was runtogether. 

 E.G. if SENDER HAS "affordable,auto,burial,car,truck,life,medical"

Is this supposed to detect "Affordable Auto Insurance"

and "AffordableAutoInsurance"

thank you.

 Mike

[quote user="mah0110"]

I had come to the conclusion that both "has" and "hasall" would refer to "words" based on a space before and after the character string which is considered to be a word. Then I found 1 instance, (after installing the latest release) where the "word" was runtogether. 

 E.G. if SENDER HAS "affordable,auto,burial,car,truck,life,medical"

Is this supposed to detect "Affordable Auto Insurance"[/quote]

As far as I know it will.

[quote]and "AffordableAutoInsurance"[/quote]

Possibly not, but I would use other methods to catch unwanted messages - are you using ClamWall or Spamhalter?  I find these to be far easier than fine-tuning content control.