Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
> On May 9, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: >> the problem is that vpopmail is using qmail-inject to forward messages. >> qmail-inject does not tolerate malformed messages. >> >> it's that simple. > > Any volunteers to review the code in vdelivermail.c and modify it to > use qmail-queue instead of qmail-inject? > Well, I just took a quick look at vdelivermail.c, and it may be simple to do. Unfortunately I don't have a system where I can really test it, but I'm willing to look at the code changes. It will also require a change to the configure system, which I have no real experience with, but short term you can specify qmail-queue for the qmail-inject path to take care of it. I'll see if I can whip up some code as a starting point and post it here shortly. Josh -- Joshua Megerman SJGames MIB #5273 - OGRE AI Testing Division You can't win; You can't break even; You can't even quit the game. - Layman's translation of the Laws of Thermodynamics [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
On May 9, 2006, at 12:57 PM, Jeremy Kitchen wrote: the problem is that vpopmail is using qmail-inject to forward messages. qmail-inject does not tolerate malformed messages. it's that simple. Any volunteers to review the code in vdelivermail.c and modify it to use qmail-queue instead of qmail-inject? -- Tom Collins - [EMAIL PROTECTED] QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
On Tuesday 09 May 2006 12:44, Michael Krieger wrote: > I don't think this is directly linked to the previous malformed e-mail that > had no Return-Path but instead had Return-Path: Received, as this has a ^Z > in the mail from whereas the e-mail before seemed to have normal > characters... unless it's all-round the use of qmail-inject as Jeremy > suggests. the problem is that vpopmail is using qmail-inject to forward messages. qmail-inject does not tolerate malformed messages. it's that simple. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ipaction.org/ -- defend your rights to fair use pgpb0ZpTFax1W.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
Have the same thing with a message with a CTRL-Z in the from/reply-to line. it's fine as a local delivery, but since forwards even within the same domain go in &[EMAIL PROTECTED] then it gets called with qmail-inject. > From: "Eva Andrews" <)^Z>> X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.9) Business> Reply-To: "Eva Andrews" <)^Z>>>qmail-inject:_fatal:_unable_to_parse_this_line:/From:_"Eva_Andrews"_<)_>/user>>_does_not_exist,_but_will_deliver_to_/home/vpopmail/domains/domain.ca/>>bob//system_error/I don't think this is directly linked to the previous malformed e-mail that had no Return-Path but instead had Return-Path: Received, as this has a ^Z in the mail from whereas the e-mail before seemed to have normal characters... unless it's all-round the use of qmail-inject as Jeremy suggests.-M
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
Nothing really different from previous versions. It uses the environment variable DTLINE for "Return-Path: whatever". It's supposed to be followed by a Delivered-To header as well... Could there be some illegal character in RPLINE? -Tom On May 8, 2006, at 8:13 PM, Michael Krieger wrote: 5.4.15- the one that was current beyond a couple days ago. -M Tom Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is this a bug in vdelivermail?� The message into vdelivermail seems to > have a valid return-path, and coming out of vdelivermail into > qmail-inject appears to blank the line but not remove it: Return-Path: > Received: from keit What version of vpopmail? vdelivermail went through huge changes in 5.4.11. -- Tom Collins - [EMAIL PROTECTED] QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
5.4.15- the one that was current beyond a couple days ago.-MTom Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On May 8, 2006, at 12:08 PM, Michael Krieger wrote:> Is this a bug in vdelivermail?� The message into vdelivermail seems to > have a valid return-path, and coming out of vdelivermail into > qmail-inject appears to blank the line but not remove it: Return-Path: > Received: from keitWhat version of vpopmail? vdelivermail went through huge changes in 5.4.11.--Tom Collins - [EMAIL PROTECTED]QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
On May 8, 2006, at 12:08 PM, Michael Krieger wrote: Is this a bug in vdelivermail? The message into vdelivermail seems to have a valid return-path, and coming out of vdelivermail into qmail-inject appears to blank the line but not remove it: Return-Path: Received: from keit What version of vpopmail? vdelivermail went through huge changes in 5.4.11. -- Tom Collins - [EMAIL PROTECTED] QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
On Monday 08 May 2006 12:08, Michael Krieger wrote: > The message comes in properly (or so it seems) and into qmail-local and > then vdelivermail. It reads a .qmail file that says &[EMAIL PROTECTED] > and has a second line with the maildir. The first one [the inject] is > failing, which vdelivermail is supposed to be handling. > > Is this a bug in vdelivermail? The message into vdelivermail seems to have > a valid return-path, and coming out of vdelivermail into qmail-inject > appears to blank the line but not remove it: Return-Path: Received: from > keit another reason why vpopmail shouldn't be using qmail-inject to forward messages, it should be using qmail-queue. I call this a bug, but others think differently. -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ipaction.org/ -- defend your rights to fair use pgpiczso8pqx3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
On Monday 08 May 2006 11:38, Michael Krieger wrote: > Sorry- I meant shouldn't this be added by qmail-local on delivery. I guess > I am trying to figure out why it isn't properly adding it. -M from qmail-command(8): DESCRIPTION ... WARNING: The mail message does not begin with qmail-local's usual Return-Path and Delivered-To lines. ... ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES ... DTLINE and RPLINE are the usual Delivered-To and Return-Path lines, including newlines. UFLINE is the UUCP-style From_ line that qmail-local adds to mbox-format files. That's why :) -Jeremy -- Jeremy Kitchen ++ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ipaction.org/ -- defend your rights to fair use pgpHjPoB1Cjkm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
The message comes in properly (or so it seems) and into qmail-local and then vdelivermail. It reads a .qmail file that says &[EMAIL PROTECTED] and has a second line with the maildir. The first one [the inject] is failing, which vdelivermail is supposed to be handling.Is this a bug in vdelivermail? The message into vdelivermail seems to have a valid return-path, and coming out of vdelivermail into qmail-inject appears to blank the line but not remove it: Return-Path: Received: from keit-MMichael Krieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Somewhat off-topic, but I'm imagining that somewhere in the mix is where this is all beginning.This is an example of a [junk but unscanned] message [slightly edited for the actual e-mail addresses, though mostly should be the same] that was received. You'll notice the Return-Path: fails to have any data or a newline after it, being prepended to a received line that already exists.I then get this in my qmail log file: qmail-inject:_fatal:_unable_to_parse_this_line:/Return-Path:_Received:_...when it tries to forward the mail based on a .qmail file.So my question is where would this be allowed into the system? Shouldn't qmail-smtpd (and simscan) be adding a proper return path based on the senders' from address when it passes it along for the initial delivery?Received: (qmail 27397 invoked by uid 89); 8 May 2006 13:12:31 -0400Received: by simscan 1.2.0 ppid: 27387, pid: 27395, t: 0.0977s scanners: clamav: 0.88.2/m:38/d:1448DomainKey-Status: no signatureReceived: from unknown (HELO 211.57.43.201) (211.57.43.201) by suede.mydomain.com with SMTP; 8 May 2006 13:12:28 -0400Received-SPF: neutral (suede.mydomain.com: 211.57.43.201 is neither permitted nor denied by SPF record at _spf.google.com)Return-Path: Received: from keith.lloyd.com (keith.lloyd.com [158.222.0.2]) by mailgate.yorkinternet.net with ESMTP; May, 08 2006 12:03:14 PM -0300Received: from mail.bellsouth.com (mail.bellsouth.com [139.76.165.130]) by mail.landg.com with smtp; May, 08 2006 10:54:17 AM -0300From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Atuh stock is on the move !!! Could double in a week qqklSender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Mime-Version: 1.0Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:12:27 -0500X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Build 10.0.2616Any help is apprecaited,-M
Re: [vchkpw] Corrupt return-path help? [OT]
Sorry- I meant shouldn't this be added by qmail-local on delivery. I guess I am trying to figure out why it isn't properly adding it.-MMichael Krieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Somewhat off-topic, but I'm imagining that somewhere in the mix is where this is all beginning.This is an example of a [junk but unscanned] message [slightly edited for the actual e-mail addresses, though mostly should be the same] that was received. You'll notice the Return-Path: fails to have any data or a newline after it, being prepended to a received line that already exists.I then get this in my qmail log file: qmail-inject:_fatal:_unable_to_parse_this_line:/Return-Path:_Received:_...when it tries to forward the mail based on a .qmail file.So my question is where would this be allowed into the system? Shouldn't qmail-smtpd (and simscan) be adding a proper return path based on the senders' from address when it passes it along for the initial delivery?Received: (qmail 27397 invoked by uid 89); 8 May 2006 13:12:31 -0400Received: by simscan 1.2.0 ppid: 27387, pid: 27395, t: 0.0977s scanners: clamav: 0.88.2/m:38/d:1448DomainKey-Status: no signatureReceived: from unknown (HELO 211.57.43.201) (211.57.43.201) by suede.mydomain.com with SMTP; 8 May 2006 13:12:28 -0400Received-SPF: neutral (suede.mydomain.com: 211.57.43.201 is neither permitted nor denied by SPF record at _spf.google.com)Return-Path: Received: from keith.lloyd.com (keith.lloyd.com [158.222.0.2]) by mailgate.yorkinternet.net with ESMTP; May, 08 2006 12:03:14 PM -0300Received: from mail.bellsouth.com (mail.bellsouth.com [139.76.165.130]) by mail.landg.com with smtp; May, 08 2006 10:54:17 AM -0300From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Atuh stock is on the move !!! Could double in a week qqklSender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Mime-Version: 1.0Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 12:12:27 -0500X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Build 10.0.2616Any help is apprecaited,-M
