Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
I bcc: myself all the time. Doesn't everybody? TF I used to. Namely when I was replying to private mails while I was in TF the office; when I bcc'ed myself, I could download my replies at home TF as well. I started this practice when I was still using Netscape Mail, TF and that client has a nice option: Automatically send a copy of each TF message to this address: In TB, I have to add the BCC macro to TF each template. I wish I could activate such a feature on Account TF level, as I could in Netscape. TF Any seconders? Nah. It's pretty easy to add it as a macro in your 3 basic templates. I bcc: myself because I frequently get into back and forth discussions and I like seeing my messages in the inbox, chronologically, with every one else's responses. Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Hello Coyle306, On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 06:46:01 -0400 GMT (28/06/03, 17:46 +0700 GMT), Coyle306 wrote: TF In TB, I have to add the BCC macro to each template. I wish I TF could activate such a feature on Account level, as I could in TF Netscape. TF Any seconders? Nah. It's pretty easy to add it as a macro in your 3 basic templates. But. If you use AB templates (which I do a lot), you have to add it to every single template. Well, I did this when I set them up, but I still thought it would be easier on account level. But it is not really a very important point. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Der Brite gibt sein Geld pfundweise aus. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/5 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using a Pentium P4 1.7 GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Hello Thomas, On Sat, 28 Jun 2003, at 18:45:10 GMT +0700 (6/28/2003, 6:45 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: But. If you use AB templates (which I do a lot), you have to add it to every single template. Well, I did this when I set them up, but I still thought it would be easier on account level. Yes. But it is not really a very important point. ;-) I think so. I have 3 main email accounts. One is for mail lists such as this one. The second is for personal email. The last is for my university account. BCC on mail list account is not needed because it should be returned. On the other hand the personal account with a BCC at the account level would be nice because simple setup and only 1 set of filters on the inbound side. On the university account I set up BCC in new and reply templates at the account level. I want to keep running dialog of all email correspondence. I think having incorporated into the interface would make it more user friendly. -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/11 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
On Fri 27-Jun-03 11:06pm -0400, Mark Wieder wrote: BM I have AutoCompletion turned BM off. I only occasionally use local delivery (I use Alt-N to get me BM to the setting page, so Alt-NAenter toggles it) - and I often like BM to edit the outbox for testing. Maybe I'm being dense today (it's been a long day), but I don't see how having your own address in the AB facilitates any of this. Nah, I just wasn't clear in the 1st sentence and wrong in the 2nd. Without AutoCompletion turned on, wouldn't one need to type in their email address each time (w/o using the AB)? My second sentence was apparently based on a bad test. I have deferred delivery on. Local delivery appeared to be ignoring that setting - I can't duplicate that behavior today in either 1.62r or the current beta. I don't keep local delivery on because I'm the only user, on my network, using TB. -- Best regards, Bill Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Coyle306- Thursday, June 26, 2003, 3:13:24 PM, you wrote: snippage happens C spammer had inserted _my address_, which _is_ in my address book. Of course, at this point I suppose I should bring up the question of why your own address is in your address book? If it weren't then the correct filtering event would have occurred... -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2 -- Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Hello Mark, Thursday, June 26, 2003, 11:34:52 PM, you wrote: MW Of course, at this point I suppose I should bring up the question of MW why your own address is in your address book? If it weren't then the MW correct filtering event would have occurred... well I have to admit i send stuff to myself all the time... for lots of weird reasons... so this is not unusual! :) -- Best regards, alistsmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
On Fri 27-Jun-03 2:34am -0400, Mark Wieder wrote: Of course, at this point I suppose I should bring up the question of why your own address is in your address book? If it weren't then the correct filtering event would have occurred... Well I have to admit that I have my address in my Family group of the AB - the handle is 'me' :-) I use it's templates for testing and uncheck them to test the Family group templates. I bet it's not that uncommon. It's best, IMHO, to avoid the known filter. If one wants to check for people in the address book - but not one's own address, one can use a normal filter for that and choose the destination (instead of no choice but Inbox-Known). -- Best regards, Bill Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
On Fri 27-Jun-03 1:23am -0400, Dave Kennedy wrote: On Thursday, June 26, 2003 7:54 PM, Bill wrote: I don't like the Know filter at all and don't use it because of its bugs on replying from Inbox-Known. What bugs? There's an inconvenience (no folder templates). The bugs are related. (1) It fails to use the account templates like other folders that don't override them. (2) If the sender is not in any AB group, the group of the To field is used - this could be embarrassing :-) There's really no need to use Inbox-Known. It much more powerful to use a normal filter than the restrictive known filter - prossibly an artifact of days before normal filters could do AB filtering. -- Best regards, Bill Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
MW Of course, at this point I suppose I should bring up the question of MW why your own address is in your address book? If it weren't then the MW correct filtering event would have occurred... I bcc: myself all the time. Doesn't everybody? I appreciate the responses on this subject, and I think I'll follow the advice to use a normal filter. Thanks to everybody. Chris Coyle Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Bill- I test-send myself stuff all the time, too, but I never considered putting myself in the AB. Since I have local delivery turned on, sending mail to my local accounts is instantaneous. Then I have some external webmail accounts so I can see the kludges. -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2 -- Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
On Fri 27-Jun-03 1:09pm -0400, Mark Wieder wrote: I test-send myself stuff all the time, too, but I never considered putting myself in the AB. Since I have local delivery turned on, sending mail to my local accounts is instantaneous. Then I have some external webmail accounts so I can see the kludges. We all work a little differently, Mark. I have AutoCompletion turned off. I only occasionally use local delivery (I use Alt-N to get me to the setting page, so Alt-NAenter toggles it) - and I often like to edit the outbox for testing. -- Best regards, Bill Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Hello Coyle306, On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:07:12 -0400 GMT (27/06/03, 18:07 +0700 GMT), Coyle306 wrote: I bcc: myself all the time. Doesn't everybody? I used to. Namely when I was replying to private mails while I was in the office; when I bcc'ed myself, I could download my replies at home as well. I started this practice when I was still using Netscape Mail, and that client has a nice option: Automatically send a copy of each message to this address: In TB, I have to add the BCC macro to each template. I wish I could activate such a feature on Account level, as I could in Netscape. Any seconders? -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Many people quit looking for work when they find a job. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/5 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using a Pentium P4 1.7 GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Bill- Friday, June 27, 2003, 12:21:56 PM, you wrote: BM We all work a little differently, Mark. grin BM I have AutoCompletion turned BM off. I only occasionally use local delivery (I use Alt-N to get me BM to the setting page, so Alt-NAenter toggles it) - and I often like BM to edit the outbox for testing. Maybe I'm being dense today (it's been a long day), but I don't see how having your own address in the AB facilitates any of this. -Mark Wieder Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 2 -- Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
I'm using 1.63 Beta 11 with Windows 98. I have the Known filter activated, and I have it move knowns to a sub-folder of the Inbox, Inbox\Known. Otherwise, they go to another sub-folder of the Inbox, Inbox\Unknown. Worked great until I received a spam, in Inbox\Known, from someone who was definitely not in my address book. Here are the headers: == Received: from iafitim [216.247.132.30] by mail.henrybeaver.com (SMTPD32-6.06) id A81FE8D10056; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:21:19 -0400 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Nolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Increase your sizelo X-Priority: 3 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:17:48 -0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary==_NextPart_003_0057_XPOCVLVJ.UQFTKQVS X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-UIDL: 346621659 Status: U == All I could think of was that the spammer's sticking _my_ address in the Reply-To: and/or the X-RCPT-TO: somehow fooled the Known filter, since _my_ address was in my address book. Sure enough, when I deleted my address from the address book, TB stopped sending it to Inbox\Known, and put it in Inbox\Unknown. Seems to me it shouldn't work that way. Chris Coyle Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
Hello Coyle306, Thursday, June 26, 2003, 6:07:42 AM, you wrote: C All I could think of was that the spammer's sticking _my_ address in C the Reply-To: and/or the X-RCPT-TO: somehow fooled the Known C filter, since _my_ address was in my address book. C Sure enough, when I deleted my address from the address book, TB C stopped sending it to Inbox\Known, and put it in Inbox\Unknown. C Seems to me it shouldn't work that way. Hmmm ... what should not work which way? It seems to me that if an email is received with a 'from address' that is in your address book it should be sent to the 'known' box. Just out of curiosity ... what would you expect to work differently? -- Best regards, MikeDmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows ME 4.90 Build 3000 --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus] Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
MM Hmmm ... what should not work which way? It seems to me that if an MM email is received with a 'from address' that is in your address MM book it should be sent to the 'known' box. Just out of curiosity MM ... what would you expect to work differently? No. That's my point, it _wasn't_ received with a 'from address' that was in my address book. It was received with a 'from address' that _was not_ in my AB. Quoting from the Sorting Office window: The Known filter allows you to separate incoming mail by the presence of the _sender's address_ in your address book (My emphasis) It appears to me that the Known filter was not triggering just on the sender's address - the From: field - but also on the Reply-To: and/or X-RCPT-TO: field in the spam's header, into which the spammer had inserted _my address_, which _is_ in my address book. The Known filter should trigger _only_ on the From: field, not on any other field in the header, right? Otherwise, a spammer - or any unknown - could stick a recipient's address in another header field and defeat the filter (assuming the recipient has his own address in his AB). Or, is the Known filter intended to trigger whenever an address in one's address book is _anywhere_ in the incoming headers? Chris Coyle Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Unexpected Behavior of Known Filter
On Thu 26-Jun-03 6:13pm -0400, Coyle306 wrote: Quoting from the Sorting Office window: The Known filter allows you to separate incoming mail by the presence of the _sender's address_ in your address book (My emphasis) Right - notice that it does not say From address - it says Sender which is more than just the From address. It appears to me that the Known filter was not triggering just on the sender's address - the From: field - but also on the Reply-To: and/or X-RCPT-TO: field in the spam's header, into which the spammer had inserted _my address_, which _is_ in my address book. It appears to use the same logic as used by the Sender in the Filter strings. That is, it checks the From, Sender and Reply-To fields. I ran a test and could not confirm your claim that it also checks the X-RCPT-TO field (note: I did this check using the Sender in the filtering strings). The Known filter should trigger _only_ on the From: field, not on any other field in the header, right? Otherwise, a spammer - or any unknown - could stick a recipient's address in another header field and defeat the filter (assuming the recipient has his own address in his AB). I don't like the Know filter at all and don't use it because of its bugs on replying from Inbox-Known. However, I find the current behavior of the filtering strings using Sender to be quite useful. Or, is the Known filter intended to trigger whenever an address in one's address book is _anywhere_ in the incoming headers? Can you demonstrate that behavior? Simply send yourself an email without your address in the From, To, Reply-To or Sender fields. Put it in a X-Test field. Let us know if you're right. If you can't do that through your ISP, simply copy and modify an existing email, place it in your inbox and manually refilter your inbox. -- Best regards, Bill Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
