On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 21:40 -0400, Alex wrote:
> > For amusement, search google for UNVERIFIED_YAHOO (and insist you really
> > mean it literally with the underscore rather than two words).
> This was a set of rules created by Mark back in 2011. Thanks for not
> flaming me.
Heh. ;)
Sorry, but I kind of expect some due diligence, in particular by long
time and experienced community members. Coming across blatantly obvious
cases of local rules being complained about to misfire might make me
snappy.
Think about it this way: In order to help you, my first step is to find
out details about those rules (grep stock cf files) and their respective
score (your sample). You provided an exemplary, flawless sample. Why did
you not have a look at the rules' sources?
> > By making us chase your local rules in archives, all you'll get is
> > fingers pointing at your own, local rule.
>
> I never intended to do that. I completely forgot this was a local
> rule. I've disabled it for now, pending any words of wisdom on
> improving it from those more knowledgeable than myself.
The rule itself was not that bad. Actually, as Kevin and Anthony pointed
out, Yahoo even expressly states in their DMARC records you should never
have genuinely received those messages, nor accepted them. Yahoo
classifies it forged.
It is the mass mailer's and its client's fault. (Back to the "cheap"
part. Doing mass mailings but don't own your own domain? Accepting and
actually using free-mailer address as sender? Even worse, failing to get
the note about Yahoo DMARC policy in that business?)
--
char *t="\10pse\0r\0dtu\0.@ghno\x4e\xc8\x79\xf4\xab\x51\x8a\x10\xf4\xf4\xc4";
main(){ char h,m=h=*t++,*x=t+2*h,c,i,l=*x,s=0; for (i=0;i<l;i++){ i%8? c<<=1:
(c=*++x); c&128 && (s+=h); if (!(h>>=1)||!t[s+h]){ putchar(t[s]);h=m;s=0; }}}
