At 20:16 2000-09-17 -0700, Dave Robbins wrote:
I got put on at least two lists on egroups.com without my approval
and certainly no action on my part. The list admin appears to funnell
You're not on the egroups list, you're on the cuy.net list. As far as
eGroups is concerned, some address at cuy.net (dads(_at_)cuy(_dot_)net to be specific)
is the subscriber -- if you attempted to reply to one of these messages to
the egroups list address, it would no doubt bounce it as a "nonmember
submission".
and notify(_at_)egroups(_dot_)com without any action or response on their part.
Try abuse(_at_)egroups(_dot_)com
:0
* ^Subject.*fathers-issues*
!dads-approval(_at_)cuy(_dot_)net
The average looser isn't going to know why they're getting a copy of the
message - unless they examine headers, they'll never know it came through
your account at all. The approval address is probably NOT the best choice,
unless you actually believe there's a human there managing the approval
process, rather than a bot, which may simply be discarding your messages
because they don't meet some special syntax.
The trailing '*' is unnecessary in your regexp.
The recipes use the subject line because other headers didn't work.
Then you were doing something wrong.
Sender: owner-dads(_at_)cuy(_dot_)net
THIS is the header you should be homing in on.
Looking at the headers, the ACTUAL list is on egroups, but the person at
cuy.net is relaying them for their own resend list.
X-eGroups-Return:
sentto-1353894-33-969239298-dads=cuy(_dot_)net(_at_)returns(_dot_)onelist(_dot_)com
I don't follow egroups and how they do things, but I'd wager that if you
extracted this address from each message, and redirected the message there,
the dads list wouldn't get much traffic from egroups quick:
:0
* ^Sender:[ ]owner-dads(_at_)cuy\(_dot_)net
* ^X-eGroups-Return: \/.*
!$MATCH
or
:0
* ^Sender:[ ]owner-dads(_at_)cuy\(_dot_)net
* ^X-eGroups-Return: \/.*
| ( $FORMAIL -r -I"Subject: unsubscribe this relay!" \
-I"To: $MATCH" -I"Bcc: abuse(_at_)egroups(_dot_)com" ;\
cat $AUTOREPLY/relay.msg ) | $SENDMAIL -t
$AUTOREPLY points to a dir where you put the message text (edit the
relay.msg file to contain something meaningful, like the listaddress of the
cuy.net relay and how it is you never subscribed to either list), set
$SENDMAIL and $FORMAIL to the sendmail and formail programs (if in the
path, just the program names will suffice).
This particular rule will also ensure that abuse(_at_)egroups(_dot_)com will recieve a
copy of your plea (remove that -I"Bcc: abuse(_at_)egroups(_dot_)com" if you don't want
this to happen). If you wanted to be nasty, you could set Reply-To to the
abuse address as well, or to the listowner address for the list at egroups
(who you might include on the BCC as too), or even to the relay admin
(owner-dads(_at_)cuy(_dot_)net), since abuse is no doubt going to generate
autoreplies. I think as it stands, it should be a reasonable plea for
help, and should trigger automated systems to unsub the account in short order.
Alternatley, you should be able to send an unsubscribe request to egroups
in the name of the relay list, and if it relays EVERYTHING it gets, the
"please acknowledge this action" message should come through pronto, so
which you could reply (to the egroups address), effectively chopping him
out of the loop. If you do this, it'd be a good idea to perform the entire
process from some throwaway webmail account, rather than the account which
is being abused, so if the relay idiot decides to take action, he won't
know who to lash out against.
With the above recipe in place, when one of these messages comes through,
procmail should generate a message to send to what is in effect the "golly,
this address is bouncing an awful lot" address at egroups (or so I surmise
that's what that address should be for, though it isn't a standard header
-- I expec they might normally look to search potentially nonstandard
bounces for this element). A sufficient number of messages later, and it
should probably be auto unsubscribed by some mechanism at eGroups.
Disclaimer: I haven't tested this, but it should work, or be extremely
close to working as is. Further, I take no responsibility for any
retribution you may get from this misguided moron at cuy.net for getting
his list unsubscribed.
---
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Post Box 2395 / San Rafael, CA 94912-2395
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail