NoSpamlchow | 1 Sep 1997 01:20
Favicon

HELP . . . I am In Desperate Need Of Your Help!

I am undergoing extreme emotional trauma as a direct result
of receiving unsolicited commercial e-mail.  How can I stop 
this?  Part of the reason I get unsolicited e-mail is because
commercial bulk e-mailers syphon e-mail addresses off the 
Internet.  They don't care who it goes to or who it hurts.
If I block their e-mail, I also block some legitimate e-mail.

I want to bounce their mail back to them to tell them NOT to
put my e-mail address on any list and to remove my e-mail address
from their list.  Many bulk e-mailers just don't want to do that and it cost
them too much money to receive e-mail back.  Manual replies to
them gets bounced.

I can not use Eudora as my computer is a small outdated one with
limited RAM and limited hard drive space.  What can I do?

PS:  I have procmail via my ISP and a UNIX shell.

Lester D. K. Chow
lchow <at> idis.com or
lchow <at> lava.net

http://www.idis.com/ChouOnline/appeal.txt
"A victim of multiple police assault!"

bortzmeyer | 1 Sep 1997 09:47
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Message-ID of Microsoft Mail is always the same?


Like, I assume, many people, I have the following in the /etc/procmailrc:

# Drop duplicates
:0:/var/tmp/.duplicate.lock
* ? formail -D 8192 $HOME/.duplicate.procmail-cache
/var/tmp/mail-duplicates

to get rid of multiple instances of the same message.

There is one problem with people who use a Microsoft mailer (headers 
hereunder, they said it is Internet Explorer Mail). It seems that *all* 
the messages coming from one site always have the same Message-ID, even 
whent sent by different people! So they all end in the duplicates 
folder...

Does anyone know how to fix that? (I really need the "duplicates 
elimination" feature.)

Headers of the offending messages. On different messages, the Message-ID is identical:

Received: from unknown (HELO inconnu) (10.1.1.65)
  by my.domain.name with SMTP; 29 Aug 1997 16:09:03 -0000
Message-id: <MAPI.Id.0016.006d6572636965633030303930303039 <at> MAPI.to.RFC822>
Priority: Normal
X-msmail-priority: Normal
X-priority: 3
Mime-version: 1.0
Old-date: Fri, 29 Aug 97 18:07:21 PDT
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
(Continue reading)

Gjermund Sxrseth | 1 Sep 1997 11:43
Picon

Re: mail separation - From and Content-Length


   Philip Guenther <guenther <at> gac.edu>:

   This is probably the best way to do it: use the header rewriting tool
   (sendmail) to generate the needed header, and let procmail do its job
   without having to modify the message length.  Assuming you have a
   relatively recent sendmail, the following sendmail.cf line should do
   the trick:

   # Condition the addition of the line on the presence of the '5'
   # flag, which should only be on the local mailer.
   H?5?Content-Length: 000000000

Thanks for the tip!  This is what we will go for.

   >But procmail should really be able to do this by itself!

   Why add quite a bit of complexity to procmail when there's already an
   efficient way to do it?

Efficient maybe, but it's still a hack. The question is whose job it is
to localy deliver the message correctly, and that's not sendmail. :)
(I don't see why this would be such a complex addition to procmail).

--
Gjermund Sørseth

Klaus Johannes Rusch | 1 Sep 1997 12:28

Re: Message-ID of Microsoft Mail is always the same?

In <199709010747.JAA02885 <at> josephine.sis.pasteur.fr>, bortzmeyer <at> pasteur.fr writes:
> 
> # Drop duplicates
> :0:/var/tmp/.duplicate.lock
> * ? formail -D 8192 $HOME/.duplicate.procmail-cache
> /var/tmp/mail-duplicates

> There is one problem with people who use a Microsoft mailer (headers
> hereunder, they said it is Internet Explorer Mail). It seems that *all*
> the messages coming from one site always have the same Message-ID, even
> whent sent by different people! So they all end in the duplicates
> folder...
> 
> Does anyone know how to fix that? (I really need the "duplicates
> elimination" feature.)

Other than by instructing your counterparts to switch to a different software 
vendor, perhaps excluding all ms-mail from your duplicates filter might be a
reasonable compromise:

:0
*!ms-mail
{
  # Drop duplicates
  :0:/var/tmp/.duplicate.lock
  * ? formail -D 8192 $HOME/.duplicate.procmail-cache
  /var/tmp/mail-duplicates
}

Klaus Johannes Rusch
(Continue reading)

era eriksson | 1 Sep 1997 12:26
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: message-ID

On Sun, 31 Aug 1997 14:54:07 +0000, "Tomas Karlsson"
<webmaster <at> iimagers.com> wrote:
 > Is there a ways to check if the message-id header line begins with 
 > Message-ID: <1997

Trivial to do, but, if you don't mind me saying so, stupid. 
  Here are the first characters from some valid messages' Id:s:

 $ sed -n 's/^Message-Id: <\(....\).*/\1/p' Mail/[^s]* | \
 > sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | pr -bt -5
     735 1997       4 UPMA        3 3407        1 wouq        1 97Se
      70 1996       4 1995        2 v021        1 s3e9        1 95Xu
      28 3.0.       3 v030        2 m0wx        1 ng1t        1 7R7u
      15 Pine       3 m0x0        2 m0wt        1 m0x1        1 2909
      11 v015       3 m0wV        2 luis        1 m0ww        1 23Vm
       6 m0x3       3 H000        2 GW42        1 m0wS        1 2349
       5 v031       3 97Au        2 7129        1 i0wB        1 2.2.
       4 m0x5       3 9703        2 6553        1 g4Ls

Just for comparison, here's a smaller sample, from spam messages:

 $ sed -n 's/^Message-Id: <\(....\).*/\1/p' \
 >  Mail/spam scratch/inbox/spam-filtered* | \
 > sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | pr -bt -5
      38 1997       1 mail        1 4314        1 2025        1 1495
       2 3.0.       1 7806        1 3083

Doesn't look to me like a particularly good criterion. As a general
comment, the Message-Id will depend on what mail software people used
to send the message; you could probably find some good regular
(Continue reading)

era eriksson | 1 Sep 1997 12:28
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Re: Message-ID of Microsoft Mail is always the same?

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:28:26 CET, Klaus Johannes Rusch
<KlausRusch <at> atmedia.net> wrote:
 > :0
 > *!ms-mail

Perhaps it would be wise to tighten this up a little bit, at least so
much as to exclude "Subject: the stupidity of ms-mail". How about
checking on the particular Message-Id you're seeing over and over again?

/* era */

--

-- 
 Paparazzis of the Net: No matter what you do to protect your privacy,
  they'll hunt you down and spam you. <http://www.iki.fi/~era/spam/>

0123456789 | 1 Sep 1997 16:04

Unidentified subject!

Procmailers,

I have been receiving an increasing amount of unsolicited email with
the From field containing all numbers before the ' <at> ', example:

   From: 03195750 <at> msn.com

I tried to puzzle out the regular expression syntax but could not find a
way to detect 'everything between From: and  <at>  is all numbers'

Any assistance greatly appreciated!

--

-tim driscoll
tdriscol <at> baynetworks.com

era eriksson | 1 Sep 1997 17:07
Picon
Picon
Favicon

Regex syntax for From: (numbers) <at> domain (was: Unidentified subject!)

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 10:04:52 -0400 (EDT), 0123456789 <at> filterthis.edu
wrote:
 > I tried to puzzle out the regular expression syntax but could not find a
 > way to detect 'everything between From: and  <at>  is all numbers'

You just missed a good discussion about it. 

Here's how to write what you mention in Procmail regex syntax:

    :0
    * ^From: [0-9]+ <at> 
    /dev/null  # or whatever

I believe you'll find that most of the spam of this type has exactly
eight digits in the user ID part, and typically doesn't contain the
domain (the stuff after  <at> ) anywhere in the Received: lines (although
this would be the case with legitimate mail from e.g. iki.fi also). 

/* era */

Perhaps you want to look in the archives: 
  <http://www.rosat.mpe-garching.mpg.de/mailing-lists/procmail/>

Beginners' texts about regular expressions are easy to find. Most
"Unix for spineless amphibians" -type titles that the bookstores are
full of these days should have a section on regexes.

--

-- 
 Paparazzis of the Net: No matter what you do to protect your privacy,
  they'll hunt you down and spam you. <http://www.iki.fi/~era/spam/>
(Continue reading)

Gregory Sutter | 1 Sep 1997 18:03
Picon

Re: Unidentified subject!

On Mon, 1 Sep 1997 0123456789 <at> filterthis.edu wrote:

>I have been receiving an increasing amount of unsolicited email with
>the From field containing all numbers before the ' <at> ', example:
>   From: 03195750 <at> msn.com
>I tried to puzzle out the regular expression syntax but could not find a
>way to detect 'everything between From: and  <at>  is all numbers'

junkfilter, my filter set, uses:

# Any number <at> *.com, address <at> number.com or number <at> number.com address : spam.
# almost.  additions will be made to the exception list only as necessary.
:0E
* ^From: ([0-9]+ <at> [0-9]+\.com|[0-9]+ <at> | <at> [0-9]+\.com)
* !^From:.* <at> 2600.com
{ SPAMMER="numbers at numbers" }

It caught your forged-From: message, btw.

GReg
--
Gregory S. Sutter                       "How do I read this file?"
mailto:gsutter <at> pobox.com                "You uudecode it."
http://www.pobox.com/~gsutter/          "I I I decode it?"
junkfilter for procmail: http://www.pobox.com/~gsutter/junkmail/

Troy Robbins | 1 Sep 1997 19:14
Favicon

Help for a Green Newbie

I'm a newbie with procmail and all I would like to do is setup procmail to
forward email to designated addresses.

Procmail is setup on my server, as per the host, which is hway.net.

I have done the following:

created a .procmail dir
created a .procmailrc file in my root dir, which contains:
INCLUDERC=$PMDIR/rc.test

created a file named rc.test in my .procmail dir, which contains email
forwarding options:
(example:)

:0:
*^TO:trobbins <at> naifa.com
! trobbins <at> cyberusa.com

-----------
I have tried deleting my .forward file as suggested by the support
department on the host.  Even tried to modify the .forward file with:
"|IFS=' `&&exec /usr/local/bin/procmail -f-||exit 75 #trobbins"

I have sent email as a test and received nothing, any suggestions?

Any help would be greatly appreciated !!

Thanks,

(Continue reading)


Gmane