Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 200 Rep.
See reduced ads
Badges
6
Newest
 Scholar
Impact
~514 people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 4 votes cast
Jul
8
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Yep, I simplified it to Return-Path: <([^\r\n]{0,99})-([\w.]+)=([\w.-]{1,99}\.[a-z]{2,8})\@([^>]+)>.+From:[^<]+<\1@\4‌​> and it works like a charm now, thanks again for your help!
Jul
8
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Would it be possible Spamassassin always parses the headers in alphabetical order? Because I've tested it using spamc -R on an existing message and I can clearly see the Return-path is before the From in the raw file. I'll try it the other way around to confirm this theory, thanks
Jul
7
comment /home/ folder deleted by error
You could also try a tool like extundelete.sourceforge.net
Jul
7
comment /home/ folder deleted by error
You can't really call that a backup then
Jul
7
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Um, I tried that: header RPATH_FAKE ALL =~ /\bReturn-Path: <([^\r\n]{0,99})-([\w.]+)=([\w.-]{1,99}\.[a-z]{2,8})\@([^>]+)>/ism and it works but this one never matches, despite the fact I tested in a regexp tester on my test mail: header RPATH_EMBEDS_FROM_ADDR ALL =~ /\bReturn-Path: <([^\r\n]{0,99})-([\w.]+)=([\w.-]{1,99}\.[a-z]{2,8})\@([^>]+)>(?:[^\r\n]{0,99}[\‌​r\n]{1,9}){1,30}From:[^\r\n]{0,99}<\1@\4/ism. Is the "From" accessible in the headers or is it considered as part of the body since it's not in the SMTP enveloppe?
Jul
7
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Yeah, I already have those enabled but it seems like I get some early spams with URLs not yet in RBLs. If I run spamassassin on them again let's say one day after, they score well with RBLs
Jul
7
awarded  Scholar
Jul
7
accepted Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Jul
7
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Thanks Adam, actually I can implement such a rule with a simple postfix header_checks but what make these spams different from a legitimate bulk email system is the From is also embedded in the Return-path, which would never be the case with an ham mail from, let's say, a newsletter. I guess writing an even more complex rule to check the From header too would even be more expensive... But I'll still adapt your first rule and test it against the From header.
Jul
6
awarded  Student
Jul
5
awarded  Commentator
Jul
5
comment Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
OK but how do you make a reference to the From header in the Return-path rule? In fact, I wouldn't even need to combine 2 rules, I just need one that tells "If Return-path equals From + my email address (with @ turned to =) is injected before the @, then bingo.
Jul
2
asked Spamassassin rule to compare return-path and from fields
Sep
28
awarded  Autobiographer
Mar
11
answered Pointing subdomain (from cpanel, hosting company) to an external public IP
Oct
28
comment Apache suEXEC execute script on user dir basis?
Once you will have mod_userdir running, suExec will run too.
Oct
22
comment Alias or redirect or rewrite
Then you should use the roundcubemail directory as document_root for the webmail.example.com vhost. Sorry but you question is still not clear enough.
Oct
22
comment Apache suEXEC execute script on user dir basis?
You already have mod_userdir configured, otherwise the /~user/ URL wouldn't work
Oct
22
answered Alias or redirect or rewrite
Oct
22
answered Apache suEXEC execute script on user dir basis?