* Re: spam.el searching blackhole servers [not found] <yovabrscrrep.fsf@relaskop.wsl.ch> @ 2003-10-21 18:34 ` Ted Zlatanov 2003-10-21 18:51 ` Jesper Harder 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-10-21 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Cc: Ding Mailing List On Mon, 20 Oct 2003, lanz@fowi.ethz.ch wrote: > spam.el does not find the name of the blackhole server if the name > of the server is - within the received header field - not enclosed > with [] parantheses. But this seems to be quite often the case. > > I know nothing about internet header field standards. Are the [] > paranthesis required? Do we find too many (or even wrong) host names > if spam-check-blackholes would not require these parantheses > surrounding a host name? For shure, I get many mail messages. where > the host name of the sender is not in the [] parantheses, but > instead often (allways?) in () parantheses as in this example from > today: > > Received: (qmail 17288 invoked by alias); 20 Oct 2003 03:52:53 -0000 > Delivered-To: adrian.lanz@wsl.ch Received: (qmail 17282 invoked by > uid 154); 20 Oct 2003 03:52:53 -0000 Received: from > d.rouse_gt@di-net.ru by mail by uid 151 with qmail-scanner-1.10 > (uvscan: v4.1.60/v4298. . Clear:0. Processed in 1.98984 secs); 20 > Oct 2003 03:52:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO inbox.lv) > (211.44.152.166) by 0 with SMTP; 20 Oct 2003 03:52:50 -0000 That's an excellent question, unfortunately I don't know the answer. Lars wrote the original code to check the blackholes, and I'll be happy to add whatever regexp is necessary - but let's make sure it's the correct one. If anyone knows for sure, or wants to point me to a relevant standard (I don't know of such a thing) I would appreciate the information. Thanks Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: spam.el searching blackhole servers 2003-10-21 18:34 ` spam.el searching blackhole servers Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-10-21 18:51 ` Jesper Harder 2003-10-23 16:15 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Jesper Harder @ 2003-10-21 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Zlatanov <tzz@lifelogs.com> writes: [Received-lines] > If anyone knows for sure, or wants to point me to a relevant > standard (I don't know of such a thing) I would appreciate the > information. RFC 2821, section 4.4. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: spam.el searching blackhole servers 2003-10-21 18:51 ` Jesper Harder @ 2003-10-23 16:15 ` Ted Zlatanov 2003-10-23 17:08 ` Reiner Steib 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-10-23 16:15 UTC (permalink / raw) On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, harder@myrealbox.com wrote: > RFC 2821, section 4.4. Looks like there is no parenthesis requirement for IP addresses, based on the RFC, so I will remove that and just use any IP address detected in the headers. Thanks! Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: spam.el searching blackhole servers 2003-10-23 16:15 ` Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-10-23 17:08 ` Reiner Steib 2003-10-23 17:35 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Reiner Steib @ 2003-10-23 17:08 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, Oct 23 2003, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > Looks like there is no parenthesis requirement for IP addresses, > based on the RFC, so I will remove that and just use any IP address > detected in the headers. | --- spam.el:6.118 Tue Oct 21 20:57:34 2003 | +++ spam.el Thu Oct 23 18:14:39 2003 | @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ | (goto-char (point-min)) | (gnus-message 5 "Checking headers for relay addresses") | (while (re-search-forward | - "\\[\\([0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+\\)\\]" nil t) | + "\\([0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+\\)" nil t) Shouldn't this be »\\.« instead of ».«? Bye, Reiner. -- ,,, (o o) ---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- PGP key available via WWW http://rsteib.home.pages.de/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: spam.el searching blackhole servers 2003-10-23 17:08 ` Reiner Steib @ 2003-10-23 17:35 ` Ted Zlatanov 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Ted Zlatanov @ 2003-10-23 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, 4.uce.03.r.s@nurfuerspam.de wrote: On Thu, Oct 23 2003, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > >> Looks like there is no parenthesis requirement for IP addresses, >> based on the RFC, so I will remove that and just use any IP address >> detected in the headers. > > | --- spam.el:6.118 Tue Oct 21 20:57:34 2003 > | +++ spam.el Thu Oct 23 18:14:39 2003 > | @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ > | (goto-char (point-min)) > | (gnus-message 5 "Checking headers for relay addresses") > | (while (re-search-forward > | - "\\[\\([0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+\\)\\]" nil t) > | + "\\([0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+.[0-9]+\\)" nil t) > > Shouldn't this be »\\.« instead of ».«? Correct, I fixed it. Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-23 17:35 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <yovabrscrrep.fsf@relaskop.wsl.ch> 2003-10-21 18:34 ` spam.el searching blackhole servers Ted Zlatanov 2003-10-21 18:51 ` Jesper Harder 2003-10-23 16:15 ` Ted Zlatanov 2003-10-23 17:08 ` Reiner Steib 2003-10-23 17:35 ` Ted Zlatanov
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).