At 02:05 PM, 15 September 1997, R Lindberg / E Winnie
<rlindber(_at_)kendaco(_dot_)telebyte(_dot_)com> wrote:
I just installed Daniel's (DanS(_at_)bristol(_dot_)com) from to/reply-to
script and
had non-valid (non-SPAM) match right away.
What happend was Execpc sends SPAM abuse responces back to the
complainers using a BCC (it's a form letter, and they don't want everyone
to see everyone elses address), with a munded TO header. Only the way they
Actually, the letter went out with no To: header. I've now fixed it so
that it does include a To: header that contains the address it's
sending to (it's always sent to only one person at a time, we don't
want ANYONE to see the other addresses).
do it the Reply-To and From headers match and it's classified as SPAM.
Thinking about this I can see other legit uses for the From and Reply-To
headers to match and suspect we need to rethink matching on From and
Reply-To.
If you're marking messages where Reply-To: = From:, that's going to
mismatch on a log of things. Technically, there's no reason for a
Reply-To: that's the same as the From, but it's fairly common.
--
Aaron Schrab aarons(_at_)execpc(_dot_)com
http://www.execpc.com/~aarons/
ExecPC Internet Systems Administration mail info(_at_)execpc(_dot_)com for
info