On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 11:41:48AM -0400, Joe Flowers wrote:
> I'm not sure what you are talking about Theo. Sorry.
I was talking about SMTP.
> Below is an envelope example from a Spam email, at least an envelope
> from my mail system.
> ---
> D1161764311
> [EMAIL PROTECT
I'm not sure what you are talking about Theo. Sorry.
Below is an envelope example from a Spam email, at least an envelope
from my mail system.
I assume the "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is useful to SA.
Is there a better form I can put this in before pre-pending to the
message body? Also, currently, the
Mark Martinec wrote:
If scanning at the MTA level with amavisd-new, a synthetic Return-Path
is prepended to a copy of a message that is given to SA for examination.
Much like David B Funk says a sendmail-SA-milter does.
MIMEDefang does this as well. It synthesizes Received and Return-Path
whe
On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 02:35:07PM -0400, Joe Flowers wrote:
> If I pre-pend a message's Envelope to it's Body, can Spamassassin do
> anything useful with it?
It depends what you mean by "a message's envelope". If you mean add in
standard headers for MAIL FROM and RCPT TO, then sure, go ahead an
> > For envelope sender there is a standard header: Return-Path
>
> Return-Path is supposed to be added when the message is placed in the
> mailstore (ie, last hop, after the transfer network). Since I do scanning
> at the MTA level before delivery, I don't have Return-Path yet.
If scanning at the
On 10/25/2006 5:46 PM, Ken A wrote:
> It should be mentioned that envelope To: is not there for a reason. :-(
> Including it in the header will remove the privacy enabled by Bcc
This is true--BCC will be made entirely pointless if the envelope
recipients are irreversibly pasted into the message
On 10/25/2006 7:15 PM, Mark Martinec wrote:
> For envelope sender there is a standard header: Return-Path
Return-Path is supposed to be added when the message is placed in the
mailstore (ie, last hop, after the transfer network). Since I do scanning
at the MTA level before delivery, I don't have
David B Funk wrote:
When the milter is passing the message to spamd, it is easy to add
synthesized headers (such as 'Return-Path:' & 'X-Envelope-To:') to pass
envelope addresses to SA (that's what I did with the milter that I use).
Still, pre-pending is 10x easier than inserting.
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Joe Flowers wrote:
> Ken A wrote:
> > It should be mentioned that envelope To: is not there for a reason.
> > :-( Including it in the header will remove the privacy enabled by Bcc,
> > so if you have privacy considerations to worry about, you might think
> > twice.
>
> I pre-p
Ken A wrote:
It should be mentioned that envelope To: is not there for a reason.
:-( Including it in the header will remove the privacy enabled by Bcc,
so if you have privacy considerations to worry about, you might think
twice.
I pre-pend the envelope to a copy of the message and then send
Eric A. Hall wrote:
> Other possibilities exist too. Envelope sender can be used for some SPF
> filters that aren't currently done, for example.
> The first problem is that there is no standard header field, and in the
> case of envelope recipient(s) where there can be multiple entries, there
> is
Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 10/25/2006 2:35 PM, Joe Flowers wrote:
If I pre-pend a message's Envelope to it's Body, can Spamassassin do
anything useful with it?
At a minimum you can use the envelope recipient(s) to do some kinds of
spam-trap filtering (eg, is the message addressed to a spamtrap
On 10/25/2006 2:35 PM, Joe Flowers wrote:
> If I pre-pend a message's Envelope to it's Body, can Spamassassin do
> anything useful with it?
At a minimum you can use the envelope recipient(s) to do some kinds of
spam-trap filtering (eg, is the message addressed to a spamtrap and me).
You can use
Hey guys,
If I pre-pend a message's Envelope to it's Body, can Spamassassin do
anything useful with it?
Joe
14 matches
Mail list logo
