On 4 Jul 2009 as I do recall, Frank de Bruijn wrote: > On 10 Jun 2009 I wrote: > > The interesting bit here is the rule number (1) and the fact the > > message was deferred because of its length. Harriet reported > > something similar in her message of 7 October (the first one to the > > list after FreeLists borked my subscription). I'll investigate. > > Actually, it has nothing to do with either the rule number or the length > test. It's a bug that shows up if the message contains an overly long > header line which isn't folded properly so AntiSpam breaks it up into > 253 byte pieces. If any of those pieces ends up starting with a colon, > things go funny... 8-( > > I'll get a bug fix release out as soon as possible, but for those who > can't wait, here's a quick fix for AntiSpam 1.61.1: Thanks: I hit this one again the other day so I'm glad to know it's identified! :-) -- Harriet Bazley == Loyaulte me lie == Cleanliness is next to impossible.