Juan Manuel P:
> Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ?
>
> like this ?
>
> /^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD
By the way that "*" at the end is useless.
> And that whats suppose to do ?
>
> It is holded the email on the queue ? and I can check with mailq command ?
> and later
On 27.04.20 13:27, Juan Manuel P wrote:
Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ?
like this ?
/^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD
And that whats suppose to do ?
if Wietse's message wasn't enough for you, I recommend looking at
http://www.postfix.org/header_checks.5.html
It is
Hello Witse do you mean to use HOLD action on header_checks ?
like this ?
/^Subject:.*hacked*/ HOLD
And that whats suppose to do ?
It is holded the email on the queue ? and I can check with mailq command ?
and later detele from queue and email me a alert
Sorry for ask and not try, because we
jmpatagonia:
> Hello I need help to using header_checks, I create a rule
>
> /^Subject:.*hacked*/ DISCARD
An alternative is to use HOLD action, assuming you aren't using
software that hijacks the HOLD feature for other purposes, such as
mailscanner. Then you can review the email with "postcat
Hello I need help to using header_checks, I create a rule
/^Subject:.*hacked*/ DISCARD
that work propertly, but a want to know it is posible to email me o to alert
me when this rule occur or is aplicated. For some way. Oviusly I see that on
the mail.log
regards
--
Sent from:
Zitat von Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:16PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
So the first one is correct and the second one not??
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= xx...@x.de
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?=
* lst_ho...@kwsoft.de lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not
possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is
split into two invalid mailadresses when doing a reply. This only
happens when there are special chars in the display name
Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* lst_ho...@kwsoft.de lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not
possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is
split into two invalid mailadresses when doing a reply. This only
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
* lst_ho...@kwsoft.de lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
The problem is that on some mails sent from Outlook it is not
possible to answer with Thunderbird because the sender address is
split into two invalid mailadresses
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:16:41AM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
Same what? Can someone explain the observed issue in some detail?
All I am seeing is questions about an ill-advised hypothetical solution.
When I put my Cyrillic name into Apple's MUA, the From: header read:
From:
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
There is no wrong To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla.
That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the root-case...
If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to file a bug.
If software X mis-handles a correctly-formatted message header,
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:12:05PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
There is no wrong To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla.
That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the
root-case...
If the bug is still present in TB3 i will bother to file a bug.
I failed to
Zitat von Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 04:12:05PM +0100, lst_ho...@kwsoft.de wrote:
There is no wrong To-Header. File a bug-report with Mozilla.
That's what i tried to find out: Who is at fault and what is the
root-case...
If the bug is still
Zitat von Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for
display-name, phrase, word, and atom.
Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= looks like an
So the first one is correct and the second one not??
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= xx...@x.de
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?= xx...@kwsoft.de
This was within one mail from Outlook/Exchange and at least
Thunderbird badly chokes on the first one when
lst_ho...@kwsoft.de:
Zitat von Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for
display-name, phrase, word, and atom.
Short answer: as long as
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 03:47:16PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
So the first one is correct and the second one not??
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=F6fler=2C_Verena?= xx...@x.de
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=27=22H=F6fler=2C_Martin=22=27?= xx...@kwsoft.de
This was within one mail from
Can anybody comment on this ugly fix for Umlauts in realnames?
# Already with Quotes (=22) thus do nothing
/^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= (.*)$/ REPLACE From:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= $2
# No quotes
/^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?(.*)\?= (.*)$/ REPLACE From:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= $2
Zitat von Ralf Hildebrandt ralf.hildebra...@charite.de:
Can anybody comment on this ugly fix for Umlauts in realnames?
# Already with Quotes (=22) thus do nothing
/^From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22(.*)=22?= (.*)$/ REPLACE From:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= $2
# No quotes
/^From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?(.*)?=
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Can anybody comment on this ugly fix for Umlauts in realnames?
# Already with Quotes (=22) thus do nothing
/^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= (.*)$/ REPLACE From:
=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22$1=22?= $2
# No quotes
/^From:
* Victor Duchovni victor.ducho...@morganstanley.com:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:57:54PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
Can anybody comment on this ugly fix for Umlauts in realnames?
# Already with Quotes (=22) thus do nothing
/^From: =\?iso-8859-1\?Q\?=22(.*)=22\?= (.*)$/ REPLACE
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
But Exchange forgets the and just encodes
L?stn?me, Firstn?me
instead of
L?stn?me, Firstn?me
thus the quoted-string encapsulation is wrong?!
RFC822..RFC5322 do not need quotes around text inside the
=?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?=, as long as there
Ralf Hildebrandt:
* Wietse Venema wie...@porcupine.org:
But Exchange forgets the and just encodes
L?stn?me, Firstn?me
instead of
L?stn?me, Firstn?me
thus the quoted-string encapsulation is wrong?!
RFC822..RFC5322 do not need quotes around text inside the
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 09:26:53PM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
if (space or special characters in realname)
return encode(add_quotes(realname))
else
return realname
fi
No, if you encode, you don't add quotes, quotes are for ASCII data that
contains special characters.
For
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:54:47PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
The rules for display names are in RFC*22. Look for the ABNF for
display-name, phrase, word, and atom.
Short answer: as long as =?iso-8859-1?Q?stuff?= looks like an
RFC2822 atom, it needs no quoting.
And of course, RFC 2047
25 matches
Mail list logo
