procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Recipe woes

2003-05-28 14:21:44
At 12:35 2003-05-28 -0500, listuser(_at_)numbnuts(_dot_)net did say:
The goal of this script is to munge my users' information from spam and
forward it on to the FTC and NANAS as well as archive the spam locally.

Well, if you're forwarding it, those particular sites aren't likely to hand it to the spammers.

I'm trying to munge all instances of my users addresses from both the
headers and the body.

Keep in mind that spammers not infrequently use encoded URLs (esp for embedded graphics in HTML email), which ties any given referral to an address in their database. Thus, if you're afraid that the FTC or whomever is going to forward your message along to the spammer as evidence that they sent spam, you're going to need to contend with coded URLs that you don't know the meaning of.

  That part is relatively easy.  What I'm having
trouble on is the quoting of the original message.  I need to quote the
full headers and body of the original spam in the body of the new message
(forward).

:0
| ( cat $AUTOREPLY/this-is-spam.txt - | \
        formail -I"Subject: SPAM REPORT" \
        -I"X-Loop: your-reporting-address(_at_)yourdomain(_dot_)tld" \
        -I"From: your-reporting-address(_at_)yourdomain(_dot_)tld" ) | \
        $SENDMAIL -f your-reporting-address(_at_)yourdomain(_dot_)tld ftcaddr 
nanasaddr

This would tack on the this-is-spam text (the file should start with a single blank line) before the message (complete with headers), and since the top of the message wouldn't have legit headers, formail would be constructing all-new headers before passing it along to sendmail.

  I haven't been able to figure that out.  I believe the munging
is working.  Here's the state my recipe is currently in:

You should head directly to the URL in my .sig, then follow the links there to information about my "sandbox", which is a setup which allows you to test recipes outside of your live mail stream, and (if you set up your recipes in a structured fashion), allows you to take a recipe from test to implementation without making any further changes to it. For instance, the sandbox redefines $SENDMAIL, so that when you send something to $SENDMAIL or use ! to forward, the message isn't actually sent to sendmail, but is instead dumped into a file which you can examine.

This would greatly simplify your debugging process.

---
 Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering

 Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
 Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies.  I'll get my copy from the list.


_______________________________________________
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>