procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: X-Loop question

1998-12-29 15:38:18

Era,

Yeah, I figured out the whole X-Loop thing before the holiday,
thanks for the feedback.

However, still have not managed to prevent auto-replies from
being generated when some replies to the first auto-reply.

I tried the formail -rD thing once I saw that in a vacation
example.  However I have not been able to get it to work.

How can you implement it in the following recipe?


# auto-reply receipe for forged spam issue
# replies with text in file and saves complaint to folder
:0BHD #grep  body and headers, D means case sensitivety
* INTERNATIONAL DRIVER'S LICENSE|UNIVERSITY DEGREE PROGRAMS
{
   :0hc
   * !^FROM_DAEMON
   * !^X-Loop: postmaster(_at_)mot\(_dot_)com
   | (formail -rt -A "X-Loop: postmaster(_at_)mot(_dot_)com" \
         -I "Precedence: junk" ; \
      cat $MAILDIR/forgeresponse.txt ) | $SENDMAIL $SENDMAILFLAGS -t

   :0:
   postmaster-spam-complaint
} 
-

Regards,

Carlos F. Sotero
Enterprise Messaging
602-446-5246 

-----Original Message-----
From: era eriksson [mailto:era(_at_)iki(_dot_)fi]
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 1998 3:16 AM
To: procmail(_at_)informatik(_dot_)rwth-aachen(_dot_)de
Cc: Carlos Sotero-O10006
Subject: Re: X-Loop question


On Sun, 27 Dec 1998 01:09:38 +0200 (EET), I wrote:
 > On Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:30:14 -0700, Carlos Sotero-O10006
 > <Carlos_Sotero-O10006(_at_)email(_dot_)mot(_dot_)com> wrote:
 >> Right now a reply to the auto reply in the message results 
 >> in another auto reply from this account.
 > This seems to mean: when a user +responds+ to the autoresponse they
 > get another autoresponse. This is probably true unless by 
some heavy
 > magic their mail program would somehow insert the X-Loop: header
 > you're looking for. (For the record, no MUA in the known universe
 > currently does this.)
 > A more or less standard way to avoid responses to autoreplies is to
 > set up the autoreply with a faux sender address which clearly says
 > "don't respond here" and if they try it anyway, they get a bounce.
 > (Personally, I'm not sure I think this is the best way to do it.)

A more elegant, but less safe, way to do it is to generate a
Message-Id with a particular pattern in it, and then don't respond to
incoming messages with Message-Id:s matching that pattern in the
References: or In-reply-to: fields. (I believe it's fairly safe to
assume your MTA will pass on any Message-Id:s inserted by your local
software. You should test this, obviously.)

And of course, you can always do the standard formail -rD thing to
never respond more than once to the same address.

You could also replace "faux header" above with e.g. your personal
address, seeing as responses to autoreplies might actually be worthy
of your attention (YMMV. If you have lots of newbies pressing the
Reply button because it looks nicer than the Delete button, you might
want to apply additional filters somewhere.)

/* era */

-- 
.obBotBait: It shouldn't even matter whether    
<http://www.iki.fi/~era/>
I am a resident of the state of Washington.
<http://members.xoom.com/procmail/>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>