Re: Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822)
On Tue, 2012-04-10 at 15:11 +0100, corpus.defero wrote: > Good afternoon, > > I have this hit: > 0.4 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822) > > Catching on: > Date: Tue, 10 Apr 12 11:36:40 +0200 > > Which in turn is produced by this line off PHP code: > $headers .= "Date: ".date(DATE_RFC822)."\n"; > > Unless I've gone made, the issue is the year being 2 digits, is that > correct? > Ignore me. $headers .= "Date: ".date(DATE_RFC822)."\n"; != $headers .= "Date: ".date(DATE_RFC2822)."\n"; Derrr, what's the matter with me..
Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822)
Good afternoon, I have this hit: 0.4 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: header (not RFC 2822) Catching on: Date: Tue, 10 Apr 12 11:36:40 +0200 Which in turn is produced by this line off PHP code: $headers .= "Date: ".date(DATE_RFC822)."\n"; Unless I've gone made, the issue is the year being 2 digits, is that correct?
Re: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822
Tony Le Piane wrote: >> We have been running our service for almost 5 years and this problem >> > started > >> with this ISP client of yours (TELEBEC) last week after they upgraded >> > their > >> servers to the latest version of SPAMASSASSIN I'm told. We are now being >> considered spammers. Note: It would be a mistake to consider TELEBEC one of our clients. They downloaded our free software and installed it, but we have no other relationship to them. (ie: they aren't paying us anything, so there's no commercial relationship here). As others have said, your headers look fine. Unless there's something subtle that's covered up by the copy-paste (ie: missing end-of-line), I think those headers shouldn't match the rule. Is there any way you can send a message out see what the message looks like after TELEBEC has processed it? It is possible (albeit unlikely) they're doing something that ends up mangling the Date header.. This would also give you the X-Spam-Status, which would tell us ALL of the rules spamassassin hit, and tell us what exact version of spamassassin they are using.
RE: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822
Dan Barker wrote: > Hold on! If you are USING the affected system, then since you replied > to me directly instead of through the list, I have your message > headers, and they went through my SpamAssassin, and did not trigger > the INVALID_DATE rule. Yep, same here. The Date header looks fine to me. /Per Jessen, Zürich
RE: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822
I think you to post the actual email somewhere where it won't be mangled by typos or whatever and then post the link for our review. We can run the message through our SpamAssassin systems to see the result. Hold on! If you are USING the affected system, then since you replied to me directly instead of through the list, I have your message headers, and they went through my SpamAssassin, and did not trigger the INVALID_DATE rule. Your headers were: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on mail.visioncomm.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL=-0.001,BAYES_50=0.001 autolearn=no version=3.1.7 X-Envelope-From:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Received: from smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.36.82] by mail.visioncomm.net (SMTPD32-8.15) id A057105E0080; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 11:14:31 -0400 Received: (qmail 346 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2007 15:14:30 - Received: from unknown (HELO tlepiane) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@99.245.199.125 with login) by smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 2007 15:14:30 - X-YMail-OSG: XbW59_gVM1nvMY0rJi2tqABT_L2Jbu8isr.CVezWeeHCZ7R2zFUn68g5txp0maaAFg-- From: "Tony Le Piane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Dan Barker'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 11:14:28 -0400 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Thread-Index: Acfr26RJaVTTLagcRu6TVtg75WdrTgAAMOFgAAECJXAAADKc8A== In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-IMail-Queuename:<3057105e00803aca> X-RCPT-TO: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Status: U X-UIDL: 488427562 and the Date: header is correct and the rule did not fire. The trick now is to get the reporting server's copy of the headers and make them fix their issue - assuming they actually do have an invalid date. Good luck with that! Dan -Original Message- From: Tony Le Piane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 11:14 AM To: 'Dan Barker' Subject: RE: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822 Hi Dan, That was a typo when I copied .. its actually -0400 I have compared it to other SMTP headers and don't see any differences. Also looked at RFC 2822 and we comply. As mentioned we been running this services for over 5 years and no all of a sudden we get classified as spam. I don't get it. Really appreciate your reply. Best Regards, Tony -Original Message----- From: Dan Barker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: August 31, 2007 11:06 AM To: 'Tony Le Piane' Subject: RE: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822 Well, the DATE header is incomplete. You could look up RFC 2822 (unless that's too much work) or just look at the date (and compare it to incoming date records from other SMTP servers). You'll see the trailing two zeros are missing (assuming you are in the Eastern Time Zone). hth Dan -Original Message----- From: Tony Le Piane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 10:54 AM To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822 > We have been running our service for almost 5 years and this problem started > with this ISP client of yours (TELEBEC) last week after they upgraded their > servers to the latest version of SPAMASSASSIN I'm told. We are now being > considered spammers. > > > > Firstly I have been told that it is a date problem (Invalid Date - not > RFC > 2822) which no one on their end can seem to give me a straight answer. Now > they are telling me to go to the SpamAssassin web-site to determine > what the > problem is. > > > > When I run my email through > http://emailcheck.activecampaign.com/index.php I get the following > error which seems to be the problem but yet I can't see this anywhere > in the > header or body of my email:"1.8 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: > header (not RFC 2822)" > > > > > > My Headers are: > > > > Received: from mail.hekru.net [66.185.198.204] by mail.hekru.net > > (SMTPD-8.22) id AE31015C; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:23:13 -0400 > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: RNS Express <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:19:26 -0400 > > Subject: CCN - 8661019249 Goods Released > > Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 > > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Status: U > > X-UIDL: 486276248 > > X-IMail-ThreadID: 3e3101aae806 > > > > > > My Bo
Invalid Date header - Date not RFC 2822
> We have been running our service for almost 5 years and this problem started > with this ISP client of yours (TELEBEC) last week after they upgraded their > servers to the latest version of SPAMASSASSIN I'm told. We are now being > considered spammers. > > > > Firstly I have been told that it is a date problem (Invalid Date - not RFC > 2822) which no one on their end can seem to give me a straight answer. Now > they are telling me to go to the SpamAssassin web-site to determine what the > problem is. > > > > When I run my email through > http://emailcheck.activecampaign.com/index.php I get the following error > which seems to be the problem but yet I can't see this anywhere in the > header or body of my email:"1.8 INVALID_DATE Invalid Date: > header (not RFC 2822)" > > > > > > My Headers are: > > > > Received: from mail.hekru.net [66.185.198.204] by mail.hekru.net > > (SMTPD-8.22) id AE31015C; Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:23:13 -0400 > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From: RNS Express <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:19:26 -04 > > Subject: CCN - 8661019249 Goods Released > > Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 > > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > X-RCPT-TO: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Status: U > > X-UIDL: 486276248 > > X-IMail-ThreadID: 3e3101aae806 > > > > > > My Body is: > > > > *8661019249* size=2 face="Microsoft Sans Serif">8661019249 face="Free 3 of 9">*90548070083893* face="Microsoft Sans Serif">90548070083893 face="Courier New,Courier,Mono">Canada Customs Response/Release Notification > ReportRelease Date: 2007/08/24Release > Time: 16:07Service Option: 257 RMD EDI > (Post-Arrival)Transaction:90548070083893Carg > o Number: 8661019249Release > Office: 497 Toronto International Airport (Pearson)Sub > Location: 4298 TOTAL EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT > FORWARDING Release Code: 4 - Goods > Released > > > > > > I have attached an example of our email that is now being considered spam. > > > > > > Thank-you for any possible guidance and resolution. > > > > Best Regards, > > Tony Le Piane > Logistics Software Corp. > (905) 881-0320 > www.logisticssoftware.com http://www.logisticssoftware.com/> > > > > The information contained in this communication and its attachment(s) is > intended only for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed and > may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from > disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, > you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying > of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in error, please notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] and > delete the communication without retaining any copies. > > Thank you.
RE: Invalid date header
> -Original Message- > From: Andreas Pettersson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 11:52 AM > To: SpamAssassin > Subject: Invalid date header > > > Hi. I got a mail with this Date header: > Date: > > which triggered this rule: > 2.2 INVALID_DATEInvalid Date: header (not RFC 2822) > > What's wrong with it? The <> ? Yes
Invalid date header
Hi. I got a mail with this Date header: Date: which triggered this rule: 2.2 INVALID_DATEInvalid Date: header (not RFC 2822) What's wrong with it? The <> ? Regards, Andreas
