Greetings;
Using fetchmail-procmail | spamc |procmail - user mailbox or /dev/null.
I've had zip luck getting a trigger line based on Undisclosed Recipients:, or
Unlisted Recipients: here, so I called up my .procmailrc and tried to enter
the check phrase by doing a copy/paste from the kmail
It sounds like an issue w/ kmail/vim and not so much a nefarious
spammer ability.
And I'm not sure what you mean by unlisted header. If you mean:
[other headers]
To:
unlisted header
Then the answer is unlisted header is actually the first line of the body.
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:55 PM,
Oh, and having a sample mail via pastebin/etc would be handy if you
want more commentary about the mail. :)
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Theo Van Dinter felic...@apache.org wrote:
It sounds like an issue w/ kmail/vim and not so much a nefarious
spammer ability.
And I'm not sure what you
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:55 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
Anybody got an idea how the spammers have managed that?
Sorry, I can't help with the invisible stuff, but I do know a little
about the other part of your question:
And better yet, how to defend against it as I'd like to /dev/null any
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:55 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
And better yet, how to defend against it as I'd like to /dev/null any
message with an unlisted header.
Bad idea to poison-pill that.
IMO the appearance of Undisclosed recipients: in a list
Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
The string Undisclosed recipients: is
actually a legal group address name.
No, it is not. It needs to be closed with ';' to be legal. This...
To: Undisclosed recipients:;
... conforms to standard, with or without spaces around the ':' and ';'
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
[...] by doing a copy/paste from the kmail displayed line when in
show all headers mode.
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 18:52 -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Oh, and having a sample mail via pastebin/etc would be handy if you
want more
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 20:00 -0500, Joseph Brennan wrote:
Martin Gregorie mar...@gregorie.org wrote:
The string Undisclosed recipients: is
actually a legal group address name.
No, it is not. It needs to be closed with ';' to be legal. This...
To: Undisclosed recipients:;
...
On Monday 23 February 2009, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Oh, and having a sample mail via pastebin/etc would be handy if you
want more commentary about the mail. :)
http://pastebin.ca/1345467
Thanks.
The question is how to craft a procmail rule that will trigger on
the 'unlisted' bit.
On Mon, Feb
On Monday 23 February 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:55 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
Anybody got an idea how the spammers have managed that?
Sorry, I can't help with the invisible stuff, but I do know a little
about the other part of your question:
And better yet, how to
On Monday 23 February 2009, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
[...] by doing a copy/paste from the kmail displayed line when in
show all headers mode.
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 18:52 -0500, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
Oh, and having a sample mail via
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Gene Heskett wrote:
I've seen both. but I didn't see a Bcc: line at all.
There is no Bcc: line (email header). Therefore, a Bcc: is supplied as a
RCPT TO during SMTP time and that is it.
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 21:41 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
On Monday 23 February 2009, Martin Gregorie wrote:
In the last year I haven't seen any mail with Unlisted recipients,
just variations on Undisclosed recipients.
I've seen both. but I didn't see a Bcc: line at all.
You wouldn't, the
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 21:41 -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
Sounds neat, but I know squat about java, sorry.
OK, I think something like this should match:
header UNDISC_RECIP To ~= /un(disclos|list)ed( |-)recipient[:;]{1,2}/i
Disclaimer: this has not been tested or compiled
As I said before, I
At 18:38 23-02-2009, Gene Heskett wrote:
The input line looks like this:
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)@gmail-pop.l.google.com
Is your MTA or POP3 client adding the @gmail-pop.l.google.com at the
end of that line?
You could add a rule to catch the no To-header comment.
On Tuesday 24 February 2009, SM wrote:
At 18:38 23-02-2009, Gene Heskett wrote:
The input line looks like this:
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input)@gmail-pop.l.google.com
Is your MTA or POP3 client adding the @gmail-pop.l.google.com at the
end of that line?
Not that I know of.
At 22:08 23-02-2009, Gene Heskett wrote:
Not that I know of. Fetchmail occasionally squawks about a race in the
PEEK_MSG function, maybe a couple times a day. ~/.procmailrc has no such
edit line in it. Obviously it did come in through my gmail account.
The MSG_PEEK is used on sockets and
17 matches
Mail list logo
