- Smartlist - lists.rwth-aachen.de

Help in redirection of mail
by Bhagwan Gupta 30 Nov '04

30 Nov '04

Hello Example (What we are supposed to do)- Take three E-mail ids one(a)yahoo.com, two(a)consulting.com, three(a)bullhorn.com. Aim is, whatever mail is coming from one(a)yahoo.com to two(a)consulting.com it will be redirected to three(a)bullhorn.com (where the three(a)bullhorn.com will see that the mail is coming to him only i,e in that mail "From" field will have one(a)yahoo.com and "To" field will have three(a)bullhorn.com Our Setup:- We are running qmail (version qmail-1.03) mail server on Red Hat Linux 7.2 We Tried:- 1) A script | /usr/bin/formail -i ''To:three@bullhorn.com' |/usr/sbin/sendmail -oi -t was written and placed in one of the configuration file (.qmail) of qmail, It worked, but the problem was with "Cc" address field and "Bcc" address field i,e if two(a)consulting.com ( any address from our domain on which a redirection is set) is placed in "Cc" or "Bcc" field, a mail loop will be there and we will be redirecting infinite mails! 2) As a Second solution Procmail was used and a script was written in .procmailrc file, :0 * !^X-Loop:two@consulting.com |formail -i "To:three@bullhorn.com" | /usr/bin/sendmail -oi -t also .qmail was configured to use procmailrc file, but now the problem was, everything is done but the sender of the mail is getting a bounce back message saying �This mail is looping so the delivery was stopped�, though the receiver is getting the mail as per our requirement.I dont want this bounce back message to go there. Can you suggest any solution for my problem?? Bhagwan Dass --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! � Get yours free!

1 0

Any noticed that Procmail 3.22 breaks X-Commands?
by Andrew Billinghurst 25 Sep '04

25 Sep '04

Ages ago when the server that I use was upgraded the X-Commands by email stopped working As there was also webtools available, I played and had general looks around and never got around to finding the cause. Anyway, I have finally tracked it down to ver 3.22 of procmail being the culprit (I stuck in symlink to an earlier version and it worked). I was wondering whether anyone else had the same problem (otherwise it may just be the local build of procmail). Or if anyone does have email X-Commands working with a procmail build of 3.22. Thanks. Regards, Andrew

1 0

Re: [SmartList] Re: faked from addresses getting through to my lists - problem and poss solution?
by Phillip Sego 09 Sep '04

09 Sep '04

I've been dealing with this for a few months on a number of lists I manage, as the Bagle virus picks up from lines from received emails on infected computers. From the pattern, it doesn't seem to be an intentional attack against listserves, it's just another #*!&^ virus. My lists are newsletter-type (with a few approved posters on each). Outlook and Outlook Express, in use by most folks, can't add custom headers. The "Organization" field is now rarely used by folks. Therefore, if I can get smartlist to look at this header field AND have the approved posters use, e.g. the organization "1234", I can have only approved posts get thru my lists. But I'm not a programmer. I simply bludgeon smartlist into submission, which is preety easy due to the many easy-to-change parameters. Here's what I came up with: Filename: rc.local.20 -------- cut here --------- HEAD=`formail -zx Organization:` # extract the header information :0fw * ^Organization:.*\[1234]\ -------- cut here --------- Alas... it doesn't work. All posts go thru regardless of the contents of the Organization field. Any ideas? -- Phil > On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 02:42:32PM -0500, rgball wrote: > > >1) go through all the list's archives and match information in the > bottom-most Received: line to > >the subscriber's address. Keep all of this in a database (not the dist > file). > > Can't rely on that. Received: lines can be faked, as long as they're > below the point of injection into the system. > > If there's spoofing going on, the spoofers are presumably motivated to > keep it happening. > > You could just rely on a valid PGP signature before passing on the > message. But there are very few lists that do this, in large part > because most people find PGP too hard to use. > > >It's still not going to be proof against a determined spoofer but should > eliminate the casual > >spammers. > > I first saw spam with fake Received: header lines some time around 1997. > > Roger >

2 1

when is the accept list read/processed? (spam problem)
by Kim Ridenour 07 Sep '04

07 Sep '04

I am having trouble with a SmartList being used to send SPAM to list recipients. I have the rc.custom file set up to reject foreign submissions. A single, authorized address in the accept file (ex: webmaster(a)mylist.com). My entire 60,000 member list just received a mailing from someone who apparently set up the authorized address, webmaster(a)mylist.com, on their own machine, then used it to send an email with attached virus. Would it be possible to avoid this problem in the future by sending a message to the list, then immediately removing the authorized "send" address from the accept file? >From the "request" record, it appears that the accept list is only read when the message is sent (not at each iteration of the call to flist.) Is this correct? If so, it seems that I could prevent spoofing by de-authorizing all senders immediately after sending a legitimate message. Thanks for your help, or any other advice you may have. Kim R

1 0

Re: problem with SmartList and FormMail
by Richard A. DeMattia 04 Sep '04

04 Sep '04

You might try putting the new subscriber's address in the subject of the email message: Subject: subscriber newperson(a)new.host and see if that suffices. -- Rick DeMattia <rad(a)nshore.org> The secret of the universe is|^&*||x|NO CARRIER

1 0

problem with SmartList and FormMail
by Parker Abercrombie 03 Sep '04

03 Sep '04

Hello, I'm having a problem using SmartList with FormMail. I have a web form that prompts for an email address, then generates a message to the newsletter subscribe address, with subject "subscribe", from the address that the user entered. The problem is that it doesn't work. No user visible error is generated, but in the message mailed to the list admin there are header lines X-Diagnostic: Already on the subscriber list X-Diagnostic: 752 listadmin(a)ourdomain.com 32744 listadmin(a)ourdomain.com In the SmartList log I see From listadmin(a)ourdomain.com Tue Aug 31 19:29:47 2004 Subject: subscribe Folder: formail -R"From X-From_:" -iDate: -iReturn-Receipt-To: -iRe 1190 It looks like SmartList thinks that the message is sent from the admin's address, and discards it since that address is already on the list, even though the "from" header is set to the new address. Sending a subscribe message from a mail client works, so the list software seems to be set up correctly. The web form is configured correctly as far as I can tell, and does put the email into the "from" header. I'm at a loss to understand why SmartList thinks these message are coming from the admin address. Any ideas? Thanks -- Parker Abercrombie <parkera AT cs.ucsb.edu>

1 0

Re:dropping non-subscriber posts without acknowledgment
by Richard A. DeMattia 23 Aug '04

23 Aug '04

David W. Tamkin remarked: > ,,, > ...Subscribers may post from other addresses without telling > you. It may be a better idea to shunt mail from unrecognized addresses > to a holding folder that you review with your own eyes. That seems to be a reasonable approach. My intention was to reduce the extra traffic of bounce messages to illegal addresses and their subsequent non-delivery notices, not so much to avoid having to see the offending messages myself as list maintainer. I'll watch the results for a while. Perhaps I'll get another bright idea. -- Rick DeMattia <rad(a)nshore.org> The secret of the universe is|^&*||x|NO CARRIER

1 0

Re: dropping non-subscriber posts without acknowledgement
by Richard A. DeMattia 22 Aug '04

22 Aug '04

David, thank you very kindly - the recipe now seems to work as I expected it to do. Do you have any comment on the overall premise? Am I doing the right thing to just drop non-subscriber mail on the floor? (After I watch that reject.nosub file for a while, I plan to change it to /dev/null if it looks like nothing useful is getting filed there...) -- Rick DeMattia <rad(a)nshore.org> The secret of the universe is|^&*||x|NO CARRIER

2 1

re: dropping nonsubsciber's posts
by Richard A. DeMattia 22 Aug '04

22 Aug '04

It occurs to me that placing this recipe at the top of rc.local.s00 might cause me to lose legitimate mail-non-delivery notices for real subscribers. Maybe I should put the address-matching in the "rejectmesg" and "quotereject" scripts, rather than in the rc.local.s00? -- Rick DeMattia <rad(a)nshore.org> The secret of the universe is|^&*||x|NO CARRIER

1 0

dropping non-subscriber posts without acknowledgement
by Richard A. DeMattia 21 Aug '04

21 Aug '04

The tremendous proportion of spam from non-subscribers has prompted me to attempt to drop all posts to my mailing list from nonsubscribers, without sending any acknowledgement at all - to avoid the bounced email multiplication factor. I have been tinkering with rc.local.s00 in an attempt to do this, but not with very much success. I have placed the following at the top of my rc.local.s00 script, but I find that nothing gets logged to the reject.nosub file, and posts with attachments from nonsubscribers get matched by recipes further down in this file. My hope was that if this recipe were matched, that no further processing of the message would be done, and that it would not be delivered nor rejected. My testing list does not have foreign_submit set. :0 * 9876543210^0 foreign_submit ?? y * -2^0 ? formail -X"From " -xFrom: -xReply-To: -xSender: -xResent-From: \ -xResent-Reply-To: -xResent-Sender: -xReturn-Path: | \ multigram -b1 -m -l$submit_threshold -L$domain \ -x$listaddr -x$listreq accept accept2 { :0 c | formail -i "Subject: ***Aug20 mod drop msg from non-subscriber***"|\ $SENDMAIL -oi $maintainer :0 A reject.nosub } Any assistance is appreciated - thank you in advance. -- Rick DeMattia <rad(a)nshore.org> The secret of the universe is|^&*||x|NO CARRIER

2 1