At 02:27 2012-07-26, Udi wrote:
Sean, You wrote the right things regarding spam but I have never
seen spam message with blank subject, just the opposite.
I haven't gone spelunking in my spew archives to check stats on that,
but I know I've seen blank subject spew (and usually, it HAS a
subject header, but it's empty). It isn't a significant portion of
the spew, but it's out there.
The blank subject messages that I get arrive from friends or
colleague with simple well known address when they want to send
instantly a not formal message. So, replay to this address does not
make problem.
Then ensure you're only sending such replies to addresses which match
a list of known associates - say, people who wouldn't consider you an
absolute d!ck for telling them to put a proper subject on their
message before you'll read it.
One more thing the you right, sending again the original body is
bad idea. I agree with your arguments and technical notes.
Further, if you really must send the original body (ironically, in
this case, the OP can't summarize with "your message: RE
_original_subject_"), then include the complete set of original
headers, more like a proper BOUNCE. If the recipient were at all
technically inclined, they'd be able to discern if it really was
their message or not. But again, these days this only serves to
redistribute the spam and potentially flag you/your server as a spammer.
Hrm, perhaps bounce the HEADERS only, rather than the message body.
I absolutely hate spam filters on corporate mail systems which
"bounce" such messages and don't include any pertinent data, just
some vague reference to "the message you sent".
And another thing - I'd check to see that MY address was cleartexted
as a To: recipient (I wouldn't bother with a Cc:, as it's ostensibly
"someone elses' discussion", and forget Bcc:). Make sure it doesn't
match a LIST either. If someone sends a message to a list and it
gets relayed to you, you could be sending a message to the listowner
or back to the list itself. Can you spell D!CK ?
But, the blank subject makes a mess in the inbox threads, so, I do
replay and ask for subject from the sender.
If you use a threading MUA, surely it uses the References: and
In-Reply-To: headers to put them together?
---
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 homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)de
http://mailman.rwth-aachen.de/mailman/listinfo/procmail