Jump to content

[Resolved] popgate parsing changed?


Recommended Posts

This message was sent from my charter ISP through my Yahoo email account which is then popped by my spamcop email account. The parse never mentions Yahoo at all.

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z763383621zf0...2c4733e1aab47fz

I don't know when this changed or if something on the popgate system changed (which would be a JT issue) but the parse used to "reset" itself when it saw the popgate transfer and I thought (though the memory does funny things sometimes) that Yahoo was mentioned in the parse.

This was noticed because I am dropping one of my addresses and have been paying closer attention to the routes messages have been taking rather than the ultimate source.

Question sent both directions to see what comes back.

*EDIT*Further testing shows that popgate headers have not changed since at least June 2003, so the parser is the likely culprit. Not a major deal since the correct source is found, but my Yahoo mailhost feels useless now ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This message was sent from my charter ISP through my Yahoo email account which is then popped by my spamcop email account.  The parse never mentions Yahoo at all.

http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z763383621zf0...2c4733e1aab47fz

I don't know when this changed or if something on the popgate system changed (which would be a JT issue) but the parse used to "reset" itself when it saw the popgate transfer and I thought (though the memory does funny things sometimes) that Yahoo was mentioned in the parse.

This was noticed because I am dropping one of my addresses and have been paying closer attention to the routes messages have been taking rather than the ultimate source.

Question sent both directions to see what comes back.

*EDIT*Further testing shows that popgate headers have not changed since at least June 2003, so the parser is the likely culprit.  Not a major deal since the correct source is found, but my Yahoo mailhost feels useless now ;)

28017[/snapback]

Please ignore this thread unless you also remember the parser resetting the parse at the popgate server. Looking back in my reports, I see it has not done this since before 12/2004 at least, so I am not going to worry about it any longer, if it has not caused a problem in this long, it probably fixed some other problem and won't do any harm. Thanks for letting me talk to myself :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember it like it was, um, today.  :)

28032[/snapback]

OK....Thank you

"POP hack, restarting chain" was the part I was remembering.

Perhaps the difference is mailhosts, which does not seem to be used in your parse but is with mine. Deputy Richard via email also remembered this bit of code and he noticed a change as well (sometime between 2003 and late 2004). Again, perhaps this is mailhost related.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...so shouldn't this topic be in the "SpamCop Email System & Accounts" forum?

DT

28075[/snapback]

I don't think so, because it is a difference in the parsing of messages, apparently based on whether mailhosts are configured or not. If the results had gone a different way, you would be correct (and I debated myself where to start it).

I believe the same "POP hack, restarting chain" exists anywhere fetchmail is in the path, but have no way to verify that personnally.

If another moderator feels differently, they are welcome to move it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how many times I came back to this trying to figure out what was actually being talked about, Steven's Tracking URL parse results bothering me a lot ... on most any other day, I'd be trying to sort out the "apparent" missing lines in that header/results-offered page, cause there should have been something in there to show that the parser should have failed the chain test in there, as there isn't anything to cover the jump from Yahoo to cesmail ... Jeff G.'s post didn't shed any light until about the 3rd ot 4th time I looked at it and finally saw the words in question .. been one of those days ...

To answer what I think is one queston ... yes, it is a MailHost thing ... here's 'my' parse of Steven's sample .. the "POP Hack" is there .... http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z763874881z1a...73b7d36c13f55cz

(noting also that it offered up a Tracking URL on a "too-old" spam submittal which tickles another issue in another conversation somewhere <g>)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer what I think is one queston ... yes, it is a MailHost thing ... here's 'my' parse of Steven's sample .. the "POP Hack" is there .... http://www.spamcop.net/sc?id=z763874881z1a...73b7d36c13f55cz

(noting also that it offered up a Tracking URL on a "too-old" spam submittal which tickles another issue in another conversation somewhere <g>)

28080[/snapback]

Thanks Wazoo...I did cancel that report since it was a test sent from my home machine, I don't want any reports against myself ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...