|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-04 17:07:11
Attachments:
rudi_floren.vcf
|
I hope christian will merge this into core. Than you can just change your vacation.conf with send_to_auto = true like the other settings. Please test with a working vacation setup with test.sh I don't have a setup with vacation running. Rudi Am Montag, 4. März 2013 18:01:51 schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2013-03-04 11:41 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> that part where you inserted your code fills the variables. >> In Perl you can run a regular expression. The expression return true or >> false. If the expression is true. you can access the content of "(...)". >> >> look at my code. I inserted your code a little bit later. After the >> empty check. There it will be processed anyway. > > Thanks very much Rudi... > > Hmmm... ok, being that I'm not a programmer (my bash skills are good > enough to scare the hell out of a real programmer)... > > It appears that you have modified vacation.pl (adding lines 177-183) in > such a way that I could just add this oneliner to vacation.conf, rather > than having to manually edit vacation.pl every time a new version comes > out? If, that would be totally awesome! > > But, I'm not sure I'm reading this correctly... > > Thanks again, as I would *love* to get this such that I could only edit > vacation.conf if/when adding new strings, and not have to worry about > changing vacation.pl with every update. > > Charles > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-04 17:38:42
|
On 2013-03-04 12:06 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > I hope christian will merge this into core. Than you can just change > your vacation.conf with send_to_auto = true like the other settings. Ok, but... I anticipate modifying these strings to test for (usually adding, but maybe sometimes removing if it results in too many false positives), so I'd like to get the entire list of test strings to test for into vacation.conf somehow... so, something like: +# Send vacation mails to do-not-reply email adresses. +# By default vacation email adresses will be sent. +# For now emails that contain any of the strings specified in $send_to_auto_false won't +# be answered when $send_to_auto is set to false. +our $send_to_auto = true; +# Strings to test for that if matched, emails will not be sent: +#$send_to_auto_false = "bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter"; > Please test with a working vacation setup with test.sh I don't have a > setup with vacation running. Will attempt to when I have some time... Many thanks again Rudi! |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-11 11:26:33
|
Ok, first, I can definitely confirm that this is working now. This is awesome. We normally have 5-10 messages per day *per user* (users that have their vacation enabled that is) that get responded to by the vacation script that shouldn't be, and now they are not, and I now have a way to manually add additional strings whenever I see something in the logs getting replied to when it shouldn't. So, many many thanks to Rudi for helping me get this working! As for my below question about adding this into vacation.conf... I understand that vacation.pl is a perl script, but shouldn't it be still be possible to define the string to test for as a variable that the script can call? One other question... Here are two examples of my line tripping: > 2013/03/11 06:20:04 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:544 main:: - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'tbobbitt#med...@au...' and smtp_sender : 'bo...@ma...' > 2013/03/11 06:20:04 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:549 main:: - Multi-string From header matching mediapost found; exiting > 2013/03/11 06:47:06 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:544 main:: - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'tbobbitt#med...@au...' and smtp_sender : 'ESC...@in...' > 2013/03/11 06:47:06 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:549 main:: - Multi-string From header matching noreply found; exiting In the first one, it matches 'mediapost' - but since 'bounce' comes before 'mediapost', why didn't it say that it matched that one? In the second, it matches 'noreply', which is not evident in the smtp_sender. So, my question is twofold... 1. Does this test test the mail-from (I'm guessing that is what the 'smtp_sender' is) *first*, *then* any from: headers? From my tests it appears so... and secondly, 2. Why does the first one not match on 'bounce' before it gets to 'mediapost'? Is the string evaluated in reverse order or something? Either way, what are the chances of getting this added to the core vacation.pl? If I have to I can just update mine manually after every postfixadmin update, which admittedly is not all that often, but I would think other admins would really appreciate what it provides. Thanks again guys! On 2013-03-04 12:38 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > On 2013-03-04 12:06 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> I hope christian will merge this into core. Than you can just change >> your vacation.conf with send_to_auto = true like the other settings. > > Ok, but... I anticipate modifying these strings to test for (usually > adding, but maybe sometimes removing if it results in too many false > positives), so I'd like to get the entire list of test strings to test > for into vacation.conf somehow... so, something like: > > +# Send vacation mails to do-not-reply email adresses. > +# By default vacation email adresses will be sent. > +# For now emails that contain any of the strings specified in > $send_to_auto_false won't > +# be answered when $send_to_auto is set to false. > +our $send_to_auto = true; > +# Strings to test for that if matched, emails will not be sent: > +#$send_to_auto_false = > "bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter"; > >> Please test with a working vacation setup with test.sh I don't have a >> setup with vacation running. > > Will attempt to when I have some time... > > Many thanks again Rudi! |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-11 12:26:41
|
On 2013-03-11 7:26 AM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > Ok, first, I can definitely confirm that this is working now. Well... I spoke too soon. It is *partly* working... Apparently it is only testing the domain part of the from: address, not the local part. A vacation message was just sent - here is the (anonymized) transaction: > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:544 main:: - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'validuser#exa...@au...' and smtp_sender : 'mai...@me...' > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:577 main:: - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from validuser#exa...@au... to val...@ex... > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"User Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:327 main::find_real_address - Found 'val...@ex...' has vacation active > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:613 main:: - Attempting to send vacation response for: <0ed...@me...> to: mai...@me..., val...@ex..., val...@ex... (test_mode = 0) > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:417 main::send_vacation_email - Asked to send vacation reply to val...@ex... thanks to <0ed...@me...> > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: val...@ex... (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation Message Body As you can see the smtp_sender localpart contains 'bounce' (mailbounce@...), but the vacation message is sent. > Here are two examples of my line tripping: <snip> > In the first one, it matches 'mediapost' - but since 'bounce' comes > before 'mediapost', why didn't it say that it matched that one? The above answers this question - it isn't (must not be) testing the local part. So, how can I modify this test so that it tests the entire from: string (lo...@ex...), instead of just the domain part (example.com)? Again, here is the current test line: > elsif (/^from:.*(alerts|autoreply|bounce|constantcontact|dealradar|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|mediapost|myspace|newsletter|noreply|no-reply|twitter).*/i) { $logger->debug("Multi-string From header matching $1 found; exiting"); exit (0); } Thanks again Rudi! Hopefully this will be the last tweak it needs. |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-11 12:37:43
|
Ok, this actually also has evidence that a Feature Request of mine may be very easy to accomplish with a minor tweak somewhere... In my last email about my new test line only testing the domain part of the from address, I noticed that the 3rd line in the vacation.log for this transaction contained: > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Firstname Lastname" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' Note that for the to: in the line above it has both the users REAL name, AND their email address. The Feature Request I have is about adding the users REAL NAME to the From: part of the vacation response. As you can see in the line where the vacation message is generated: > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: val...@ex... (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body text. It has ONLY the users email address... So, is there a variable already available (the one that populates the users name in the 3rd line) that we can add into the vacation.pl script that will result in the above line being: > 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Firstname Lastname" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. Thanks for any suggestions/responses... |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-11 14:55:42
|
Hey, i just looked at my code and found that it is not working. I pushed a fixed version to github. Another version with the pattern written in the config part is also pushed to github(newest). Please check your vacation.pl I don't modified any elseif cases. Rudi Am 11.03.2013 13:26, schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2013-03-11 7:26 AM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: >> Ok, first, I can definitely confirm that this is working now. > Well... I spoke too soon. It is *partly* working... > > Apparently it is only testing the domain part of the from: address, not > the local part. A vacation message was just sent - here is the > (anonymized) transaction: > >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:544 main:: - Script argument SMTP recipient is : 'validuser#exa...@au...' and smtp_sender : 'mai...@me...' >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:577 main:: - Converted autoreply mailbox back to normal style - from validuser#exa...@au... to val...@ex... >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"User Name" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:327 main::find_real_address - Found 'val...@ex...' has vacation active >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:613 main:: - Attempting to send vacation response for: <0ed...@me...> to: mai...@me..., val...@ex..., val...@ex... (test_mode = 0) >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:417 main::send_vacation_email - Asked to send vacation reply to val...@ex... thanks to <0ed...@me...> >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: val...@ex... (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation Message Body > As you can see the smtp_sender localpart contains 'bounce' > (mailbounce@...), but the vacation message is sent. > >> Here are two examples of my line tripping: > <snip> > >> In the first one, it matches 'mediapost' - but since 'bounce' comes >> before 'mediapost', why didn't it say that it matched that one? > The above answers this question - it isn't (must not be) testing the > local part. > > So, how can I modify this test so that it tests the entire from: string > (lo...@ex...), instead of just the domain part (example.com)? > > Again, here is the current test line: > >> elsif (/^from:.*(alerts|autoreply|bounce|constantcontact|dealradar|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|mediapost|myspace|newsletter|noreply|no-reply|twitter).*/i) { $logger->debug("Multi-string From header matching $1 found; exiting"); exit (0); } > Thanks again Rudi! > > Hopefully this will be the last tweak it needs. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester > Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the > endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to > tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-11 15:14:40
|
In line 546 the RFC 822 Style (e.g. "Real NAME" <us...@ex...> ) is converted to RFC 821 (us...@ex...) I don't know why actually. @christian do know something about that? Rudi Am 11.03.2013 13:37, schrieb Tanstaafl: > Ok, this actually also has evidence that a Feature Request of mine may > be very easy to accomplish with a minor tweak somewhere... > > In my last email about my new test line only testing the domain part of > the from address, I noticed that the 3rd line in the vacation.log for > this transaction contained: > >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:587 main:: - Email headers have to: '"Firstname Lastname" <val...@ex...>' and From: '"ge...@me..." <ge...@me...>' > Note that for the to: in the line above it has both the users REAL name, > AND their email address. > > The Feature Request I have is about adding the users REAL NAME to the > From: part of the vacation response. As you can see in the line where > the vacation message is generated: > >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: val...@ex... (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body text. > It has ONLY the users email address... > > So, is there a variable already available (the one that populates the > users name in the 3rd line) that we can add into the vacation.pl script > that will result in the above line being: > >> 2013/03/11 07:51:39 DEBUG> /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl:429 main::send_vacation_email - Will send vacation response for <0ed...@me...>: FROM: '"Firstname Lastname" <val...@ex...>' (orig_to: val...@ex...), TO: mai...@me...; VACATION SUBJECT: Out of Office ; VACATION BODY: Vacation message body test. > Thanks for any suggestions/responses... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester > Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the > endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to > tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2013-03-14 23:21:03
|
Hello, first: wow, I really like to see so much traffic on the mailinglist! :-) Unfortunately this also means my personal mailq (as in "read the mails") is more than full, so my answer is a bit late. Am Montag, 11. März 2013 schrieb Rudi Floren: > In line 546 the RFC 822 Style (e.g. "Real NAME" <us...@ex...> ) > is converted to RFC 821 (us...@ex...) > I don't know why actually. > > @christian do know something about that? Most of vacation.pl is "grown code" from the times before I started to work on PostfixAdmin, and I focus more on the PHP side of things. (Maybe David knows more?) I had a short look at vacation.pl. strip_address() is called in various places, and if you check the code around the calls, it is needed in most cases to check or validate the mail address etc. OTOH, keeping the original value in another variable (and using it as needed) shouldn't be hard. Nevertheless keep in mind that the realname could contain funny[tm] stuff, so please keep an eye on security ;-) Regards, Christian Boltz -- > Manfred, Du solltest so spaet keine Emails mehr schreiben :-) Danke für die Berichtigung, werd mir den Tipp hinter die Ohren schreiben und nur noch Mailen, wenn ich die Augen zumindestens zu einem drittel aufkriege. [> Thomas Hertweck und Manfred Tremmel in suse-linux] |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-11 16:06:24
|
Hi Rudy, Ok, I guess I'm dumb (well, I'm definitely not a programmer/developer)... I can't find your version anywhere. I checked the postfixadmin site, and there is nothing there newer than 3/3/13, and googling postfixadmin+github just brings up a bunch of sites talking about how to SWITCH from postfixadmin to other similar solutions... Can you help with a link? Thanks! Charles On 2013-03-11 10:55 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > Hey, > > i just looked at my code and found that it is not working. I pushed a > fixed version to github. Another version with the pattern written in the > config part is also pushed to github(newest). > > Please check your vacation.pl > I don't modified any elseif cases. |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-11 16:12:06
|
Here my fixed version: https://github.com/valkum/postfixadmin/blob/bff4b1e0fa5fce44e495ef21a3209324a2599719/VIRTUAL_VACATION/vacation.pl and with pattern in config: https://github.com/valkum/postfixadmin/commit/725b3ecf6550b860eea58eed544fce40f2551021 (untested) Am Montag, 11. März 2013 17:05:56 schrieb Tanstaafl: > Hi Rudy, > > Ok, I guess I'm dumb (well, I'm definitely not a > programmer/developer)... I can't find your version anywhere. I checked > the postfixadmin site, and there is nothing there newer than 3/3/13, and > googling postfixadmin+github just brings up a bunch of sites talking > about how to SWITCH from postfixadmin to other similar solutions... > > Can you help with a link? > > Thanks! > > Charles > > On 2013-03-11 10:55 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> Hey, >> >> i just looked at my code and found that it is not working. I pushed a >> fixed version to github. Another version with the pattern written in the >> config part is also pushed to github(newest). >> >> Please check your vacation.pl >> I don't modified any elseif cases. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester > Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the > endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to > tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 13:36:36
|
Thanks for your help Rudi!
Ok, one minor issue
I was initially getting the following error:
Mar 12 07:55:05 myhost postfix/pipe[18487]: 85B8DB233EA:
to=<valid#exa...@au...>,
orig_to=<va...@ex...>, relay=vacation, delay=2.1,
delays=0.08/0.19/0/1.8, dsn=5.3.0, status=bounced (Command died with
status 255: "/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl". Command output: Global
symbol "$my_noreply" requires explicit package name at
/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 589. Missing right curly or square
bracket at /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 627, at end of line
syntax error at /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 627, at EOF
Execution of /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl aborted due to compilation
errors. )
Adding single quotes around the (true or false) value fixed it.
Also, below note that I changed the variable name (I preferred this to
work differently, hopefully you'll see my logic here), and required it
to be enabled vs disabled to work:
So, instead of a default of
our $send_to_auto = true;
In vacation.pl I now have these defaults:
our $my_noreply = 'false';
#our $my_noreply_pattern =
"bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter"
and in vacation.conf I have
$my_noreply = 'true';
All further tests are poisitive (as expected), so, the new multi-string
test now seems to be fully functional... again, many thanks!
Ok, now, trying to get your new string-as-variable option working (just
defining things in vacation.pl until I get it working there, then will
try moving it to vacation.conf), so that I can define the
$my_noreply_pattern variable...
Just enabling it (not even using it in the actual test module) causes it
to fail with the following error (different from the one above):
Mar 12 08:42:22 myhost postfix/pipe[18940]: D75FCA14AC6:
to=<valid#exa...@au...>,
orig_to=<va...@ex...>, relay=vacation, delay=0.5,
delays=0.16/0.01/0/0.33, dsn=5.3.0, status=bounced (Command died with
status 255: "/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl". Command output: "my"
variable $subject masks earlier declaration in same scope at
/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 189. "my" variable $messageid masks
earlier declaration in same scope at /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl
line 190. "my" variable %opts masks earlier declaration in same scope at
/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 194. syntax error at
/var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 172, near ") {" Can't use global $0
in "my" at /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl line 194, near "Usage: $0"
Execution of /var/spool/vacation/vacation.pl aborted due to compilation
errors. )
I tried changing the single quotes to double quotes, ie:
> #our $my_noreply_pattern = "bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter"
But it still fails...
Any ideas?
Thanks again Rudi...
|
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 14:12:39
|
On 2013-03-11 11:14 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > In line 546 the RFC 822 Style (e.g. "Real NAME"<us...@ex...> ) is > converted to RFC 821 (us...@ex...) > I don't know why actually. > > @christian do know something about that? Would love to figure out if there is a way to 'save' the original 'To:' in the full RFC 822 style for later use (or just disable this block of code and leave them as RFC 822 style addresses?) when sending the vacation message... |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-12 14:50:56
|
Look in my latest commit (0beb663) on github.com https://github.com/valkum/postfixadmin I changed the varname to answer_noreply and added missing ; to end of pattern. also it uses numerical values, since 'true'(string) and 'false'(string) is not the same es true(1) and false(0). Rudi |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-12 15:02:08
|
btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 16:01:51
|
Perfect!!
I can confirm that this works perfectly with both options moved to
vacation.conf!
Thanks Rudi!
Just to confirm, here is what I now have:
vacation.pl:
# By default vacation messages will be sent to all senders that can not
# definitively be determined to be email lists or other senders that
# should not be auto-replied to.
# By enabling the $custom_noreply option, you can then modify the list
# of strings in line xxx of the main vacation.pl script. These strings
# are tested against both the envelope sender and all from headers, and
# if a match is found, skips sending the vacation message.
our $custom_noreply = 0;
# variable to define the custom do-not-reply strings as a variable
our $custom_noreply_pattern =
'bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter';
and the actual code executed:
# Be very careful modifying the strings in $custom_noreply_pattern if
# $custom_noreply is true.
# The defaults are:
(bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter)
if($custom_noreply && ($from =~ /^.*($custom_noreply_pattern).*/i)) {
$logger->info("Mail from $from matches custom do-not-send string
and shouldn't be auto-replied to.");
exit(0);
Then, in vacation.conf:
# By default vacation messages will be sent to all senders that can not
# definitively be determined to be email lists or other senders that
# should not be replied to. You can enable $custom_noreply option, then
# modify the list of strings in $custom_noreply_pattern. These strings
# are tested against both the envelope sender and all from headers, and
# if a match is found, no message is sent.
$custom_noreply = 1;
$custom_noreply_pattern =
'alert|autoreply|bounce|constantcontact|dealradar|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|mediapost|myspace|newsletter|noreply|no-reply|twitter';
Now to lunch, then I'll look at what you did about the Real Name option
and see if I can get that working too...
:)
On 2013-03-12 10:50 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote:
> Look in my latest commit (0beb663) on github.com
> https://github.com/valkum/postfixadmin
>
> I changed the varname to answer_noreply and added missing ; to end of
> pattern.
> also it uses numerical values, since 'true'(string) and 'false'(string)
> is not the same es true(1) and false(0).
>
>
> Rudi
|
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 18:06:46
|
On 2013-03-12 11:01 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. > I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) Hmmm... Trying to figure this out... So, you're saying that by adding this one-liner change, it will change the 'From:' of the vacation message to RFC 822 style? As soon as you get the repo back on line I'll look at this more closely. I must say that with your helping to get the custom_noreply stuff working right, if we can get this last item working, I'll basically have no more complaints about the vacation module... :) Thanks again |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-12 18:09:30
|
ah. my thunderbird shows all of this as the same thread. no. there is such a function for noreply check. lets start a new thread for the From field. Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 19:06:17 schrieb Tanstaafl: > On 2013-03-12 11:01 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. >> I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) > > Hmmm... > > Trying to figure this out... > > So, you're saying that by adding this one-liner change, it will change > the 'From:' of the vacation message to RFC 822 style? > > As soon as you get the repo back on line I'll look at this more closely. > > I must say that with your helping to get the custom_noreply stuff > working right, if we can get this last item working, I'll basically have > no more complaints about the vacation module... :) > > Thanks again > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester > Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the > endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to > tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 18:30:03
|
On 2013-03-12 2:09 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > ah. my thunderbird shows all of this as the same thread. no. there is > such a function for noreply check. > lets start a new thread for the From field. Ok... thanks... |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 18:29:03
|
David/Christian, What are the chances of getting these changes added to the core vacation.pl code? My current open Feature Request for this is: https://sourceforge.net/p/postfixadmin/feature-requests/56/ This is now working perfectly, even to the point of being able to add these to vacation.conf. Of course, its only been in operation for a few hours, but I've thrown quite a few tests at it, and seen it working for 2 of our people who have theirs activated... Thanks for your consideration - and most of all thanks to Rudi for getting this working! Charles On 2013-03-12 12:01 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > Perfect!! > > I can confirm that this works perfectly with both options moved to > vacation.conf! > > Thanks Rudi! > > Just to confirm, here is what I now have: > > vacation.pl: > > # By default vacation messages will be sent to all senders that can not > # definitively be determined to be email lists or other senders that > # should not be auto-replied to. > # By enabling the $custom_noreply option, you can then modify the list > # of strings in line xxx of the main vacation.pl script. These strings > # are tested against both the envelope sender and all from headers, and > # if a match is found, skips sending the vacation message. > our $custom_noreply = 0; > # variable to define the custom do-not-reply strings as a variable > our $custom_noreply_pattern = > 'bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter'; > > and the actual code executed: > > # Be very careful modifying the strings in $custom_noreply_pattern if > # $custom_noreply is true. > # The defaults are: > (bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|myspace|twitter) > if($custom_noreply && ($from =~ /^.*($custom_noreply_pattern).*/i)) { > $logger->info("Mail from $from matches custom do-not-send string > and shouldn't be auto-replied to."); > exit(0); > > Then, in vacation.conf: > > # By default vacation messages will be sent to all senders that can not > # definitively be determined to be email lists or other senders that > # should not be replied to. You can enable $custom_noreply option, then > # modify the list of strings in $custom_noreply_pattern. These strings > # are tested against both the envelope sender and all from headers, and > # if a match is found, no message is sent. > $custom_noreply = 1; > $custom_noreply_pattern = > 'alert|autoreply|bounce|constantcontact|dealradar|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|mediapost|myspace|newsletter|noreply|no-reply|twitter'; > > Now to lunch, then I'll look at what you did about the Real Name option > and see if I can get that working too... > > :) > > On 2013-03-12 10:50 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> Look in my latest commit (0beb663) on github.com >> https://github.com/valkum/postfixadmin >> >> I changed the varname to answer_noreply and added missing ; to end of >> pattern. >> also it uses numerical values, since 'true'(string) and 'false'(string) >> is not the same es true(1) and false(0). >> >> >> Rudi |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 19:01:38
|
On 2013-03-12 2:28 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote: > # By default vacation messages will be sent to all senders that can not >># definitively be determined to be email lists or other senders that >># should not be replied to. You can enable $custom_noreply option, then >># modify the list of strings in $custom_noreply_pattern. These strings >># are tested against both the envelope sender and all from headers, and >># if a match is found, no message is sent. Rudi (or anyone), Is my above comment accurate in that BOTH the envelope sender AND any other From headers are examined during this test? Or is this only a test of the envelope sender? Thanks |
|
From: Christian B. <pos...@cb...> - 2013-03-14 23:40:30
|
Hello, Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 schrieb Tanstaafl: > What are the chances of getting these changes added to the core > vacation.pl code? Rudi has commit access, so I'd say the chances are quite good ;-)) (Rudi, I'm not sure if you also have the permissions to close tracker items etc. If not, please tell me.) Regards, Christian Boltz -- Was schlagen sie vor, Prof. Dr. cvs. Boltz? :-) [Ratti in fontlinge-devel] |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 20:45:48
|
Wait... are you saying that one-liner change takes the place of the other block of code? hmmmm...... On 2013-03-12 2:09 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > ah. my thunderbird shows all of this as the same thread. no. there is > such a function for noreply check. > lets start a new thread for the From field. > > Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 19:06:17 schrieb Tanstaafl: >> On 2013-03-12 11:01 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>> btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. >>> I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) >> >> Hmmm... >> >> Trying to figure this out... >> >> So, you're saying that by adding this one-liner change, it will change >> the 'From:' of the vacation message to RFC 822 style? >> >> As soon as you get the repo back on line I'll look at this more closely. >> >> I must say that with your helping to get the custom_noreply stuff >> working right, if we can get this last item working, I'll basically have >> no more complaints about the vacation module... :) >> >> Thanks again |
|
From: Rudi F. <rud...@go...> - 2013-03-12 20:47:37
|
should. Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 21:45:18 schrieb Tanstaafl: > Wait... are you saying that one-liner change takes the place of the > other block of code? > > hmmmm...... > > On 2013-03-12 2:09 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >> ah. my thunderbird shows all of this as the same thread. no. there is >> such a function for noreply check. >> lets start a new thread for the From field. >> >> Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 19:06:17 schrieb Tanstaafl: >>> On 2013-03-12 11:01 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>>> btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. >>>> I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) >>> >>> Hmmm... >>> >>> Trying to figure this out... >>> >>> So, you're saying that by adding this one-liner change, it will change >>> the 'From:' of the vacation message to RFC 822 style? >>> >>> As soon as you get the repo back on line I'll look at this more closely. >>> >>> I must say that with your helping to get the custom_noreply stuff >>> working right, if we can get this last item working, I'll basically have >>> no more complaints about the vacation module... :) >>> >>> Thanks again > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. > Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics > Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: > http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar > _______________________________________________ > Postfixadmin-devel mailing list > Pos...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/postfixadmin-devel |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-12 21:07:02
|
Ok, thanks, I'll experiment in the morning... On 2013-03-12 4:47 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: > should. > > Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 21:45:18 schrieb Tanstaafl: >> Wait... are you saying that one-liner change takes the place of the >> other block of code? >> >> hmmmm...... >> >> On 2013-03-12 2:09 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>> ah. my thunderbird shows all of this as the same thread. no. there is >>> such a function for noreply check. >>> lets start a new thread for the From field. >>> >>> Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 19:06:17 schrieb Tanstaafl: >>>> On 2013-03-12 11:01 AM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote: >>>>> btw. in line 597, there is such a functionality. >>>>> I moved the new code into this function. (commit 5e9d4d7) >>>> >>>> Hmmm... >>>> >>>> Trying to figure this out... >>>> >>>> So, you're saying that by adding this one-liner change, it will change >>>> the 'From:' of the vacation message to RFC 822 style? >>>> >>>> As soon as you get the repo back on line I'll look at this more closely. >>>> >>>> I must say that with your helping to get the custom_noreply stuff >>>> working right, if we can get this last item working, I'll basically have >>>> no more complaints about the vacation module... :) >>>> >>>> Thanks again |
|
From: Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> - 2013-03-13 15:43:48
|
On 2013-03-12 5:06 PM, Tanstaafl <tan...@li...> wrote:
> On 2013-03-12 4:47 PM, Rudi Floren <rud...@go...> wrote:
>> Am Dienstag, 12. März 2013 21:45:18 schrieb Tanstaafl:
>>> Wait... are you saying that one-liner change takes the place of the
>>> other block of code?
>>>
>>> hmmmm......
>> should.
> Ok, thanks, I'll experiment in the morning...
Ok, a few issues/questions...
There is one typo for sure: line 599, $adress should be $address
Next...
Shouldn't
'$custom_noreply_pattern == 1'
actually be
'$custom_noreply == 1' ?
Also, I am naming my two options
$custom_noreply
and
$custom_noreply_pattern
It just seems more correct to me.
So, I now have this line as:
> ($custom_noreply == 1 && $address =~ /^.*($custom_noreply_pattern).*/i) ) {
So, assuming you accept my modified variable name for the pattern, is
this correct?
Next to last question...
Wouldn't it make more sense to adjust the defaults for the custom
pattern to include all of the values in the immediately prior two tests,
and change this to just the one test, instead of basically having three
separate tests (one to test the local part, the next to test the domain
part, and finally our new custom one to test the whole thing?
And if this is ultimately the desired goal, we could rename the
variables one last time, and end up with something like:
> if($address =~ /^(noreply|postmaster|mailer\-daemon|listserv|majordomo|owner\-|request\-|bounces\-)/i ||
> $address =~ /\-(owner|request|bounces)\@/i ) {
> # $address =~ /\-(owner|request|bounces)\@/i ||
1. only ONE new variable that contains all of the predetermined strings,
and just a comment explaining how to modify this variable to include new
strings or tweak existing ones or even remove them if they are causing
too many false positives:
# This is the list of strings that is checked against both the
# envelope sender and any/all From header addresses that, if
# matched, results in the vacation message not being sent.
our $noreply_pattern =
'bounce|do-not-reply|facebook|linkedin|list-|listserv|mailer\-daemon|majordomo|myspace|noreply|owner\-|\-(owner|request|bounces)|postmaster|request\-|twitter';
Then the new 'sub check_and_clean_from_address' function would be
something like:
> sub check_and_clean_from_address {
> my ($address) = @_;
> my $logger = get_logger();
>
> if($address =~ /^.*($noreply_pattern).*/i) ) {
> $logger->debug("sender $address contains $1 - will not send vacation message");
> exit(0);
> }
> $address = strip_address($address);
> if($address eq '') {
> $logger->error("Address $address is not valid; exiting");
> exit(0);
> }
> #$logger->debug("Address cleaned up to $address");
> return $address;
> }
And finally, last question...
What is the practical limit on the number of characters that can be
included in this variable?
So, before I enable these changes, what do you think? If this looks
correct, I'll enable it and test it live for the next few weeks on my
server...
Thanks again Rudi!
Charles
|
