Hi,
not exactly what you ask for, but:
I think it is absolutely safe to block "From: Smart Invest" and "Subject:
become rich" with PCRE rules in header checks.
Greets,
Ludi
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: owner-postfix-us...@postfix.org Im
Auftrag von Fourhundred Thecat
Gesendet: Fre
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, Fourhundred Thecat wrote:
I am receiving spam emails, where the "to:" line is entirely missing in
the email header.
[...]
Are there any legitimate cases where "to:" might be missing?
Many e-mails are sent to "BCC" lists, so they have no To: header (or have one
with "und
> Am 15.04.2022 um 08:49 schrieb Fourhundred Thecat <400the...@gmx.ch>:
>
> Are there any legitimate cases where "to:" might be missing?
RFC 5322 says: "The only required header fields are the origination date field
and the originator address field(s).", i. e. the "Date:" and the "From:" head
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:06:35 +0200
Tinne11 wrote:
>
> > Am 15.04.2022 um 08:49 schrieb Fourhundred Thecat
> > <400the...@gmx.ch>:
> >
> > Are there any legitimate cases where "to:" might be missing?
>
>
> RFC 5322 says: "The only required header fields are the origination
> date field and
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, li...@lazygranch.com wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:06:35 +0200
Tinne11 wrote:
Am 15.04.2022 um 08:49 schrieb Fourhundred Thecat
<400the...@gmx.ch>:
Are there any legitimate cases where "to:" might be missing?
RFC 5322 says: "The only required header fields are the o
[ Rédigé dans le sens de lecture normal.
Written in the usual reading direction. ]
Le (on) 23/03/2022, Homer Wilson Smith a écrit
(wrote):
[...]
| Presently I got 3 drives rsyncing from the mail drive repeatedly through
| out the day. It works...
This looks like the best method to manag
Daniel Azuelos:
> [ R?dig? dans le sens de lecture normal.
> Written in the usual reading direction. ]
>
> Le (on) 23/03/2022, Homer Wilson Smith a ?crit
> (wrote):
>
> [...]
> | Presently I got 3 drives rsyncing from the mail drive repeatedly through
> | out the day. It works...
>
> Th
On 15/04/22 6:49 pm, Fourhundred Thecat wrote:
I am receiving spam emails, where the "to:" line is entirely missing in
the email header.
The header has "X-Original-To:" and "Delivered-To:", but no "to:" line.
I have pasted the header here: https://ctxt.io/2/AABg30FRFQ
How could I block such em
Dnia 15.04.2022 o godz. 02:21:46 li...@lazygranch.com pisze:
>
> The header doesn't look odd because the mailing list provides a TO
> field.
No, it doesn't. I don't see any "To:" field in the headers of Tinne11's
message. I do see a "Cc:" field, but not "To:".
And referring to the original quest
On 2022-04-15 08:49, Fourhundred Thecat wrote:
I am receiving spam emails, where the "to:" line is entirely missing in
the email header.
The header has "X-Original-To:" and "Delivered-To:", but no "to:" line.
I have pasted the header here: https://ctxt.io/2/AABg30FRFQ
How could I block such e
On 2022-04-15 10:47, Bernardo Reino wrote:
Many e-mails are sent to "BCC" lists, so they have no To: header (or
have one with "undisclosed-recipients").
bcc does not remove or add to
So I'd be careful with rejecting/filtering only based on that.
spammers does not know all that details :=)
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022, Benny Pedersen wrote:
On 2022-04-15 10:47, Bernardo Reino wrote:
Many e-mails are sent to "BCC" lists, so they have no To: header (or
have one with "undisclosed-recipients").
bcc does not remove or add to
I didn't say that :)
(maybe the "so they have no.." implied so
On 14.04.22 08:26, Emmett Culley wrote:
I recently changed the host name of one of the servers from one domain I am
hosting to another of the domains the server is serving.
Upon verifying the server I noticed that the Received: headers on email
sent via that server now have the new host name
On 4/15/22 10:15 AM, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 14.04.22 08:26, Emmett Culley wrote:
I recently changed the host name of one of the servers from one domain I am
hosting to another of the domains the server is serving.
Upon verifying the server I noticed that the Received: headers on emai
> On 2022 Apr 15, at 07:30, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> On 2022-04-15 10:47, Bernardo Reino wrote:
>
>> Many e-mails are sent to "BCC" lists, so they have no To: header (or
>> have one with "undisclosed-recipients").
>
> bcc does not remove or add to
No, and that's not what what said. However
On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 04:30:19PM -0600, @lbutlr wrote:
> However, it is *very* common for a BBC email to have a To header with
> no email address in it at all,
This violates RFC5322 and earlier versions. The "To:" header must
contain at least one address (or group).
https://datatracker.ie
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:06:35 +0200
Tinne11 wrote:
>
> > Am 15.04.2022 um 08:49 schrieb Fourhundred Thecat
> > <400the...@gmx.ch>:
> >
> > Are there any legitimate cases where "to:" might be missing?
>
>
> RFC 5322 says: "The only required header fields are the origination
> date field and
17 matches
Mail list logo
