Re: Check equal headers
On 5/21/19 3:48 AM, Jari Fredriksson wrote: > > >> Giovanni Bechis kirjoitti 20.5.2019 kello 17.00: >> >> Hi, >> in a rule I would like to check if "From:" != "Reply-To:", is this possible >> without writing any code or should I add a new function in HeaderEval ? >> Thanks & Cheers >> Giovanni >> > > Hello! > > I have this in my /etc/spamassassin/local-rules.cf > [...] > header __FROM_V_REPLY eval:check_for_from_v_replyto_dom() > warn: rules: error: unknown eval 'check_for_from_v_replyto_dom' for __FROM_V_REPLY Do you have some custom code maybe ? Anyway I wrote what I have in mind in a different way, thanks. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/gbechis/20_freemail.cf?view=diff&r1=1859609&r2=1859610&pathrev=1859610 Thanks & Cheers Giovanni
Re: Check equal headers
> Giovanni Bechis kirjoitti 20.5.2019 kello 17.00: > > Hi, > in a rule I would like to check if "From:" != "Reply-To:", is this possible > without writing any code or should I add a new function in HeaderEval ? > Thanks & Cheers > Giovanni > Hello! I have this in my /etc/spamassassin/local-rules.cf header __FROM_EQ_TO eval:check_for_from_equals_to() meta L_FROM_EQUALS_TO !(ALL_TRUSTED || DKIM_VERIFIED) && __FROM_EQ_TO describe L_FROM_EQUALS_TO From: and To: have the same username score L_FROM_EQUALS_TO 1.0 header __FROM_V_REPLY eval:check_for_from_v_replyto_dom() header __PREC_BULK Precedence =~ /bulk|list/ meta L_FROM_NOT_REPLY !(__PREC_BULK||ALL_TRUSTED||DKIM_VERIFIED) && __FROM_V_REPLY describe L_FROM_NOT_REPLY From: and Reply-To: have different domains score L_FROM_NOT_REPLY 1.0 Br. Jarif
Check equal headers
Hi, in a rule I would like to check if "From:" != "Reply-To:", is this possible without writing any code or should I add a new function in HeaderEval ? Thanks & Cheers Giovanni
Re: LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT does not hit
On Mon, 20 May 2019 11:57:42 +0200 Tobi wrote: > Hi list > > We have the case that the LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT rule should match upon > a message, but it doesn't. After checking the message we found that > if we replace the UTF8 encoded subject header with a plain ascii > containing the relevant string for LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT it suddenly > matches. > > > Subject: =?utf-8?B?...?= > > and localpart name.firstname cannot be found in subject > > but if we change > > > Subject: [Reminder] name.firstname Your email will > > the localpart is found in subject. It shouldn't be. LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT matches the localpart in the subject only in very specific formats. If I run the above Subject header and a matching To header though SA $ printf 'Subject: ...\nTo: name.firstn...@example.com\n' | spamassassin | grep LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT I get no match.
LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT does not hit
Hi list We have the case that the LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT rule should match upon a message, but it doesn't. After checking the message we found that if we replace the UTF8 encoded subject header with a plain ascii containing the relevant string for LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT it suddenly matches. > Subject: =?utf-8?B?...?= and localpart name.firstname cannot be found in subject but if we change > Subject: [Reminder] name.firstname Your email will the localpart is found in subject. We're using spamassassin 3.4.2 on CentOS 7. We had to redact the subject and localpart for this report as they contain customers personal details. -- tobi
