If I cast my mind back, the reason such diagnostic data was put into a
Received: header was solely because Exchange-5.0 had a tendency to
remove all non-standard headers.
However, I think it would be easier and more correct to stop using a
Received: header and make it a X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: header?
Would that have any downside for anyone? Literally just changing a line?
Jason
On 12/08/11 01:11, spamassassinb...@htl-leonding.ac.at wrote:
> qmail-scanner inserts his own header creating incomplete redundant
> information (it doesn't show authentication information).
>
> it inserts
> Received: from 1.1.1.1 (user1@domain.local@1.1.1.1) by
> firstmailserver (envelope-from <user1@domain.local>, uid 201) with
> qmail-scanner-2.05st
>
> in front of qmail's received header
> Received: from unknown (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (user1@domain.local@188.45.128.1)
> by 0 with ESMTPA; 29 Apr 2011 18:23:53 -0000
>
> This confuses spamassassins trust path code. So there was somebody who
> inserted code into spamassassin to ignore qmail-scanner's
> received-headers.
>
> I don't know whether this code was always incomplete or if there was a
> change since qmail-scanner-2, because the code only matches lines like
> Received: from 1.1.1.1 by firstmailserver (envelope-from
> <user1@domain.local>, uid 201) with
> qmail-scanner-1.25st
>
> The version-code is not checked so it would probably work with newer
> versions, but it doesn't handle the case correctly where
> "(user1@domain.local@1.1.1.1)" is appended, causing authenticated mails to
> be handled like unauthenticated in which case dial-up originator-IPs cause
> problems with PBL checks.
>
> So everytime somebody sends an authenticated mail connected via his
> dial-up connection using his qmail-scanner-2 enabled mail-relay (inserting
> this header), this is causing trouble at the destination server, when it
> is running spamassassin with RBL checks enabled.
>
> According to somebody replying to the bug report at spamassassin's
> bugzilla qmail-scanner should not insert such received-headers in the
> current manner. I don't confirm nor negate this, but there should be
> something done to prevent legitimate mails from being regarded as spam on
> the recipient's site only because of the combination of dial-up IP,
> PBL-check at the recipient and qmail-scanner-2 being run on the
> mail-relay.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system,
> user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take
> the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the
> tools developers use with it.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Qmail-scanner-general mailing list
> Qmail-scanner-general@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
--
Cheers
Jason Haar
Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd.
Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417
PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get a FREE DOWNLOAD! and learn more about uberSVN rich system,
user administration capabilities and model configuration. Take
the hassle out of deploying and managing Subversion and the
tools developers use with it.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/wandisco-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Qmail-scanner-general mailing list
Qmail-scanner-general@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
