On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 04:04:44PM -0600, mw-list-spf-discuss(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu
wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 04:18:45PM +0000, Brian Candler wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2004 at 10:11:39AM -0600,
mw-list-spf-discuss(_at_)csi(_dot_)hu wrote:
This requires much more work because it requires parsing DATA.
Very minor difference I would say.
Big difference in complexity: envelope info is reliably obtained from
clearly structured input. Can you show me a filter that would
reliably identify a real bounce message from DATA across all platforms?
It doesn't need to reliably identify a real bounce message; all it needs to
be able to do is to determine if it contains a signed cookie and extract it
if so.
For a header like
X-bounce-key: example.net-1;you(_at_)example(_dot_)com;1077198109;fb7e6ffa;
then a regexp like
X-bounce-key:\s*example\.net-1;you(_at_)example\(_dot_)com;(\d+);(\w+)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
keyid recipient
would do (you know the keyid and recipient address you expect to see, so you
substitute them directly into the regexp)
This assumes the body has been through any necessary base64 or
quoted-printable decoding (although it would be a perverse MTA that adds
quoted-printable encoding to text which doesn't need it)
Regards,
Brian.