procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Forcing valid date format in headers?

2001-04-08 13:11:45
At 12:46 08-04-2001 -0400, Dallman Ross wrote:
>> From: Stan Ryckman <stanr(_at_)sunspot(_dot_)tiac(_dot_)net>
>
>> Back on 23 March 2001, Alan Glover wrote:
>>
>> > I get some email with unusual date formats, eg:
>> >
>> > Date: Wed Mar 21 07:23:08 AST 2001
>> >
>> > I'd like to set up a procmail recipe that spots this, and rewrites
>> > the Date field.
>> >
>> [snip]
>>
>> Use GNU date; get it if you don't have it.  It's pretty tolerant of
>> offbeat date formats, and does indeed handle the one you gave.
>>
>> [snip]
>
>Looked good, but I'm wondering about the premise for this in the
>first place.  Frankly, illegal date formats are one highly successful
>major indicator of spam in my recipe set.  I don't recall ever seeing
>a false positive.  (I get 15-30 spams a day and snag 97% of them,
>with very few false positives.)

I agree with you, but unfortunately this is a genuine source of email for me, which I haven't yet managed to get mended at source. For those wanting to avoid the product, it's called Collaboration Manager, by Vertical Sky.

I use Eudora as my mail agent, and regularly switch the indexing between sender and date to find particular messages. Every time I go back to date ordering, all these messages from Collaboration Manager end up near the top of the mailbox because Eudora doesn't accept this format (which I also agree with).

(Thanks for the suggestions Stan - I'll give it a try.)

Alan

_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

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