Bugs item #1535214, was opened at 2006-08-06 12:20 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by anadelonbrin You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=1535214&group_id=61702
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Mail without a To: field not sent to Inbox Initial Comment: NOted that spamBayes classified mail as ***Ham*** AND it does show up properly as Ham in the review of database BUT is ***NOT*** passed on to the Inbox (OE) and therefore is totally missing as new mail, either spam, unsure or ham. Until today after using SB for more than a year I realized that a good part of my mail was missing but only readable in the reviews of SpamBayes mail. So far NO spam arrives without a To: field in the body so that this is not an unresolvable problem. (BTW, the biggest new spam problem is 'image based' spam, which is not easily dealt with by text based statistical methodology.) I can bypass this (and as of today, 8/6/06) have in OE by setting up an OI Microsoft "rule" which is executed prior to allowing SpamBayes inputs. This hack sends such erroneous mail to the Inbox despite SpamBayes proper classification as Ham but not processing proxying it properly to the Inbox. I can provide any file that the developer(s) might want but with considerable annotation as I personally know what is Ham vs. Spam. --- John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin) Date: 2006-08-08 09:53 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=552329 BTW, I have verified that this does indeed work (mail from Apple Mail using only bcc (so there isn't a To: header) to Outlook Express 6 (XP Home) using spambayes 1.0.4 and spambayes 1.1a2 with the notate_to option set to unsure & spam. With both, the message arrived correctly, with no To: header. You're now saying that the messages aren't received by Outlook Express at all, so what we need is a copy of your most recent log and to know what version of spambayes you are using. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Date: 2006-08-08 07:26 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1569546 Tony --- The issue is not random contrary to an my earlier statment as I can see what is happening. I received ***4*** msgs today from my associate in France. Only ***one*** of them was pased thru to OE. The other three have identical errors in the header. (1) All come from a Mac with the header --- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2). (2) All 4 have an X-Spambayes-Classification:ham. I repeat ham. (3) The 3 that were not passed thru show 'to:none in the X-Spambayes-Evidence header. (4) The one that got was passed thru shows 'to:name:john l jacobs in the evidence. (5) The latter 'to:' evidence traces do not effect the classification as Ham. I don't think that is the issue that is causing SB to fail to pass this Ham onto OE. (6) The only unique thing is that the singular msg that was passed to OE has a "To:" header, in fact addressed to me. The other 3 were sent using Bcc:, I believe in the senders Apple Mail(er). (7) The other 3 lack entirely the "To: header --- and the evidence data shows that despite my guess that the evidence noting this is irrelevant. My config requires that the only 'spam' or 'unsure' be appended to the "To:" header. (If Ham nothing is appended. Since the three that were not passed thru to OE would not have had anything appended, they being Hamn, I have to conclude that the problem is that Spambayes, contrary to your belief, does NOT pass thru msgs that completely lack a "To:" header at least when the configuration would ***require*** the evaluation to be appended to that header --- whether it would be or not. This is a definitely a bug but I've not done any programming in decades so am unable to analyze anything but the result but it can replicate it or rather it replicates itself daily with Apple Mail incoming from my associate. And BTW, as you have said anything passed thru to OE would be seen by OE and could be acted on by its 'Rules'. I am incorrect in stating that I have a workaround in the 'Rules'. My first jump at this is logically and factually impossible and does not work. I have deactivated ALL rules at this point to exclude OE as the culprit here. Here is the header of 1 of the 3 that did not get passed to OE. Looking at this in webmail I am not sure that the entire evidence section got "pasted" properly --- it looks shorter than the original --- I hat web mail (!!!) Anyway you will note the complete lack of a "To:" header. The other 2 msgs are the same and were not passed to OE............ Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 22258 invoked by alias); 7 Aug 2006 06:23:11 -0000 Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 24167 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2006 06:23:11 -0000 Received: from smtpout.mac.com ([17.250.248.174]) (envelope-sender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) by mail26.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; 7 Aug 2006 06:23:11 -0000 Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/8.12.11/smtpout04/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k776N7tF024876; Sun, 6 Aug 2006 23:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (aputeaux-152-1-62-72.w82-120.abo.wanadoo.fr [82.120.168.72]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin08/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k776Mwdn004025; Sun, 6 Aug 2006 23:23:00 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=Apple-Mail-120-530927214 From: Tom Gaston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: The Original Statue of Liberty was created in France...Here, in Lorraine. Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 08:23:06 +0200 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) X-Spambayes-Classification: ham X-Spambayes-Spam-Probability: 0.00 X-Spambayes-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'x-mailer:apple mail (2.746.2)': 0.03; 'received:10.13': 0.04; 'received:17': 0.04; 'received:17.250': 0.04; 'received:17.250.248': 0.04; 'received:mac.com': 0.04; 'received:smtpout.mac.com': 0.04; 'from:addr:nygaston': 0.04; 'from:name:tom gaston': 0.04; 'received:10.13.10': 0.05; 'message-id:@mac.com': 0.05; 'from:addr:mac.com': 0.07; 'received:192.168.1': 0.08; 'received:192.168.1.11': 0.09; 'content-type:multipart/mixed': 0.12; 'content-type:image/jpeg': 0.14; 'received:10.13.10.153': 0.16; 'subject:skip:F 10': 0.16; 'filename:fname piece:jpg': 0.19; 'received:10': 0.21; 'received:192.168': 0.26; 'received:192': 0.29; 'subject:The': 0.37; 'to:none': 0.61; 'subject:.': 0.67; 'charset:us-ascii': 0.69; 'received:com': 0.73; 'received:network': 0.81; 'subject:Original': 0.84; 'subject:created': 0.84; 'subject:was': 0.91; 'subject:,\n\t': 0.98 X-Spambayes-MailId: 1154931838 --Apple-Mail-120-530927214 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: image/jpeg; x-mac-type=4A504547; x-unix-mode=0644; name="IMG_4811.jpg" Content-Disposition: inline; filename=IMG_4811.jpg I do believe I have isolated what is happening here though I do not have the skills any longer to examine the code. Regards, John (414-255-7000) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin) Date: 2006-08-07 14:25 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=552329 The body of a message is everything after the blank line that separates the headers and body (see RFC2822). SMTP servers are meant to *add* headers (to the DATA portion, which is the only part that gets to the recipient). You don't need any headers in a message, and SMTP isn't the only way to deliver mail. If there isn't a To: header and you are using the notate_to option, then a To: header (containing only the notation) is added. Again, either mail gets to OE or it doesn't. If it doesn't get there, then it doesn't matter what you do with rules, the mail isn't there to be processed. Does the mail get to OE or not? If it doesn't, then please attach a log file for when this happened and let us know which version of SpamBayes you are using. If the mail does arrive in OE, then I still don't understand what the problem is here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Date: 2006-08-07 13:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1569546 To: Tony Meyer Let me define the SMTP 'body' as all the text that is not entered by SMTP servers in transit. The 'To:', 'From:' and 'Subject:' fields have the same status as the rest of a msg and none are even necessary to send mail. Try it by connecting to any SMTP server and send a msg by entering the SMTP commands (by brute force). The 'Envelope' header is the part of a msg added by the sending server and all intermediaries (of which their should be none --- relays). Now, proceeding here, there is a mailer used by an associate (in France) which sends Bcc: mail without and 'body' To: header whatsoever. My guess is that when that mail arrives since there is no 'To:' body header there is no place for Spambayes to add the 'ham', 'spam' or 'unsure' literals. The lack of a 'To:' field results in the mail being in the 'Browse Messages' listing and can be read there but it is NOT passed on to OE. It stops at the proxy. Carrying this further, if I use the 'To":' header for Spambayes to add the 'ham', 'spam' or 'unsure' result and I get a msg that has no 'To:' header (whether you want to call this the 'body' or the 'envelope' not being relevant, then you tell me where Spambayes is to put the resultand literal string. It simply does not exist in msgs from this mailer. I am trying to get around this by using OE's 'rules' but that is unreliable and really a cludge/hack. It appears to me that Spambayes recognize the ^^^lack of the field***, in this case the 'To:' field, which is configured for the concatination of the 'ham', 'spam' or 'unsure' string. If that is the configuration as mine is, Spambayes does not know what to do and though the messages are readable from browsing they get droped at that point and asre not passed on. I hope this clarifies the issue. Regards, John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Tony Meyer (anadelonbrin) Date: 2006-08-07 09:45 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=552329 This isn't particularly clear, sorry. The POP3 proxy lets *all* mail through - either with an X-Spambayes-Classification header, or an X-Spambayes-Exception header if something went wrong. Messages don't generally have a "To" in the body - this is in the headers of the message. Perhaps that was what you meant? Certainly every mail client I have seen (which includes all of the major OS X ones) does include a "To" header (but none include it in the body). If you are able to fix this by using a rule in OE, then that means that the mail *is* being delivered to Outlook Express - or the rule would never see it. Could you explain further what you mean? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: jljacobs (jljacobs) Date: 2006-08-07 08:13 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1569546 John here again ---- I note that the lack of SB passing Ham onto OE's Inbox is for me exclusively related to mail from a Mac where the mailer totally fails to insert the "To:" in the msg body. I am at a loss to deal with this as it does not always occur but appears to happen randomly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=498103&aid=1535214&group_id=61702 _______________________________________________ Spambayes-bugs mailing list Spambayes-bugs@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes-bugs