ahoier Posted September 4, 2007 Share Posted September 4, 2007 Today I received an e-mail to my gmail account, and reported it the same way I've been reporting all of my gmail spam: View Original, Control+A (to select all), Control+C (to Copy contents of message), switch to spamcop reporting field, Control+V (to paste it in), hit the Enter key. And I got the following error: Finding links in message body Ignored 93-bit part error: couldn't parse head Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message More information on this error.. no links found But I've copied completely what was sent to me: Delivered-To: me[at]gmail.com Received: by 10.142.78.19 with SMTP id a19cs202936wfb; Tue, 4 Sep 2007 06:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.29.18 with SMTP id c18mr5334961agc.1188912151797; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 06:22:31 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: <ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net> Received: from 124.112.28.15 ([124.112.28.15]) by mx.google.com with SMTP id 38si5660129aga.2007.09.04.06.22.23; Tue, 04 Sep 2007 06:22:31 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 124.112.28.15 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net) client-ip=124.112.28.15; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 124.112.28.15 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net) smtp.mail=ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2007 06:22:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <46dd5c17.26015a0a.2578.1000SMTPIN_ADDED[at]mx.google.com> Received: from nycny.net ([142.59.168.156]) Received: from 208.184.175.204[at]nycny.net ([185.122.214.30]) Wed, 05 Sep 2007 11:25:27 +0600 Received: from nycny.net ([163.4.64.83]); Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:19:27 +0400 Lang_Translation: 46353 ver 1.381 adsl_Rerouteinfo: C.Hanchett-204_41E4_83B41DT6.12745456 To: marco42[at]gmail.com, cflasher[at]gmail.com, bjosic[at]gmail.com, eatorama[at]gmail.com, vcalva[at]gmail.com, lobbestuur[at]gmail.com, kporche[at]gmail.com, quismom[at]gmail.com, gtamaster[at]gmail.com, me[at]gmail.com, alicetangas[at]gmail.com From: "real young to middle-aged women" <ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net> Reply-To: "real young to middle-aged women" |ceciliawortzjef[at]horsefan.net| Subject: FWD:Neihoff Content-Type: 93-bit Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 39-bit MIME Version: 1.2.6?Guynn N. Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:24:27 +0400 Marco42 We promise it now: Without curative effect , will return the fund hxxp://hpjkfv.topxbox2.com Any ideas? The tracking URL is http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1418703399z4...5890e11bf49488z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 4, 2007 Share Posted September 4, 2007 From: "Wazoo" To: "SpamCop Deputies" Subject: Parser / Header lines/data Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2007 12:26:35 -0500 http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=8668 References Tracking URL; http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1418703399z4...5890e11bf49488z Ignoring header lines; Lang_Translation: 46353 ver 1.381 adsl_Rerouteinfo: C.Hanchett-204_41E4_83B41DT6.12745456 as the parser didn't seem to choke on those However, there would seem to be some interaction going on with the Content descriptions. ignored but called out in parse: Content-Type: 93-bit Duplicate Content-Type: text/plain line possible used ...????? However, nothing 'said' about the lines; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 39-bit MIME Version: 1.2.6?Guynn N. Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:24:27 +0400 Is this possibly where the 'ending' parser error message stems from? Finding links in message body Ignored 93-bit part error: couldn't parse head Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message 'edited' copy of the spam seems to have parsed just fine at http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z1418807282z8...7efceae4acf9ccz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 Do with it what you will .... the only response I received; probably -- looks like your analysis is correct I don't see where I can offer anything more to this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Betsy Posted September 21, 2007 Share Posted September 21, 2007 If you are technically non-fluent the way I am, the 'analysis' is still confusing. However, a long time ago, before the Forum, someone, possibly Wazoo, explained to me that the headers contain two versions of the Content line: Content-Type: 93-bit Content-Type: text/plain It is only supposed to have one. The parser requires a blank space between the headers and the body of the message so when it sees the first Content-type, it stops reading the headers and looks for a blank line. It sees the next Content line and thinks there is a problem so it sends you an error message that it can't find the message body. If you delete one of the Content lines, the parser is happy and keeps going until it hits a blank space and then it looks for 'links' in the message body. I don't really remember whether matching the Content-type to MIME is important. If it is, then which line you delete is important. You are not supposed to change anything in the headers, but deleting one of the Content lines doesn't generate complaints because it does not affect where the spam came from. You can delete it without notice by the administration if you want to take the trouble to report the spam. At least, that's my understanding. Miss Betsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelsh Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 It might not have been your fault: sometimes something in a message trips this warning. I've received "Message body parser requires full, accurate copy of message" errors even when the message was held by SpamCop and therefore had to be a full and accurate copy. If I was a spammer, I'd find out exactly what trips this exception and make sure that ALL of my spam included it. <grin> But then, if it happened a lot, SpamCoup would have to remove it. Nothing's perfect and I could live with the fact that SpamCop won't parse/report a message here and there but it bothers me that the explanation given if you click "More information on this error.." used to (may still; I haven't checked it lately) insist that the problem was human error even though in some cases it can't have been. The explanation is incomplete and frustrating to people who are trying to figure out what's happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 It might not have been your fault: Did you actually read all the posts? No one said it was ahoier's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Betsy Posted October 5, 2007 Share Posted October 5, 2007 <snip> The explanation is incomplete and frustrating to people who are trying to figure out what's happening. My experience has been that if you want to understand what is happening, you have to learn a lot about how email works. A lot of times, I have just decided that since I don't plan to apply for a server admin job any time soon, I will just let it go. Other times, I have irritated the heck of various posters by asking dumb question after dumb question until I understand. I can give you a pretty decent explanation of the difference between a 'misdirected bounce' and a rejection by the server. However, my explanation of why some IP addresses are 'internal' would generate a bunch of 'corrections!' I can also tell you how to change a tire and how a piston engine works, but there are some things about cars that all I know is that it doesn't sound right. Had a pick up truck that made an awful noise if you went over 45 for several miles. It kept going however. Never did find out what caused it. Just didn't drive over 45. All depends on how serious you are about understanding email. Miss Betsy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.