petzl Posted September 8, 2019 Share Posted September 8, 2019 3 hours ago, nh905 said: How do we get this issue escalated to someone at SpamCop.net who can get the parser updated? Would help if you could show a "Tracking URL" when you parse and before submitting there id a link at top of page Copy and past that link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nh905 Posted September 8, 2019 Author Share Posted September 8, 2019 Following the tracking URL reveals my email address, and I get enough spam,. Many people have already provided tracking URLs related to this problem . The header record that appears to cause the problem is: Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by .yu57f1N5JknNfW@expressdeal.world id YnC0jEIIBD7P for <x>; Sun, 08 Sep 2019 00:07:39 +0100 (envelope-from <contact@expressdeal.world>) Pasting the headers with the dot/period removed along with body text into SpamCop allows parsing to complete successfully. Regards, Norbert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petzl Posted September 8, 2019 Share Posted September 8, 2019 1 hour ago, nh905 said: Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) Seems to be from a network, SpamCop can't parse network email Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nh905 Posted September 11, 2019 Author Share Posted September 11, 2019 On 9/8/2019 at 4:09 PM, petzl said: Seems to be from a network, SpamCop can't parse network email @petzl, several people have reported the same problem. The 'solution' is to remove mailhosts support or drop the dot/period in front of .yu57f1N5JknNfW@expressdeal.world. I currently use fetchmail to pull mail in my spam folder and then forward it to Spamcop. I tried writing an awk scri_pt to remove the dot/period but that causes multiple mail messages to be concatenated into one. There appears to be a way to force an end-of-stream conditions between mail files but I do not have the cycles to investigate further. Regards, Norbert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnarlymarley Posted September 12, 2019 Share Posted September 12, 2019 On 9/8/2019 at 12:58 PM, nh905 said: Received: from localhost (127.0.0.1) by .yu57f1N5JknNfW@expressdeal.world id YnC0jEIIBD7P for <x>; Sun, 08 Sep 2019 00:07:39 +0100 (envelope-from <contact@expressdeal.world>) I see a dot at the beginning of the domain at right after the "by". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelmer Jellema Posted September 17, 2019 Share Posted September 17, 2019 On 9/12/2019 at 1:32 AM, nh905 said: @petzl, several people have reported the same problem. The 'solution' is to remove mailhosts support or drop the dot/period in front of .yu57f1N5JknNfW@expressdeal.world. I currently use fetchmail to pull mail in my spam folder and then forward it to Spamcop. I tried writing an awk scri_pt to remove the dot/period but that causes multiple mail messages to be concatenated into one. There appears to be a way to force an end-of-stream conditions between mail files but I do not have the cycles to investigate further. Regards, Norbert I agree. There is now enough information in the form of positive and negative examples for Spamcop to fix this. The fix probably involves some backslash in a regexp or something like that. Is there anything we can do to speed it up (or fix it)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted September 22, 2019 Share Posted September 22, 2019 Yes, the hostname in the Received header is clearly invalid, but given the parser's job, it really needs to not stop working when there's something invalid in a part of the headers that spammers control. This has been broken since at least April. If it's not at least on some internal to-do list by now, I would submit that there's something wrong with the process here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Good news, this seems to have been fixed (oddly without a change in the SpamCop version.) Now to click through all the saved "unreported" spam from the last few months… 🙂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lking Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 23 minutes ago, Tesseract said: saved "unreported" spam from the last few months Of course anything over two days old will be rejected by SC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Of course. Just getting it out of the queue so I'm only notified of actual unreported messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelmer Jellema Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 O that would be great! I'll try it out today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.