Re: SpamCop doesn't parse routing info correctly
"Mike Easter" <[email protected]> Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:26:23 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamcop.help |
|---|---|
| Organization | SpamCop |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Using cite marks per par instead of per line to prevent shortlines. Tristan Miller wrote: > I'm running into an odd problem where SpamCop fails to correctly identify the source of an e-mail. Correct. SC breaks the parse chain prematurely on one of your examples because of a noncompliant server. > When I forward to SpamCop an offending e-mail that I received at my personal account ([email protected]), SpamCop correctly identifies the source as an IP at the University of Arizona. Using SC to determine the source of this kind of mail is appropriate, but you shouldn't be SC reporting these as spam -- I'm assuming that you are not. > My employer ([email protected]) is also on the spammer's mailing list. However, when they (or I) send their copy of the very same e-mail to SpamCop, it fails to identify the source as the University of Arizona. Correct. SC correctly parses yours at nothingisreal; SC incorrectly parses the worldsocialism because there is a noncompliant MTA mailserver in the chain.. > This is very strange, since both copies of the e-mail contain the same Received header giving a U of A IP (128.196.165.21 = PUB-E3.AHSL.Arizona.EDU): Yes, but there is a lot between the sourceline and the last MTA. SC trips on the way for worldsocialism because of a noncompliant server line. See abbreviated headers below. > Both our domains, nothingisreal.com and worldsocialism.org, are hosted by DreamHost. The only major difference in our setup is that I use fetchmail to download my mail via POP3 from mail.nothingisreal.com and deliver it to a local mail server, whereas my employer checks mail via IMAP on mail.worldsocialism.org. The headers are distinctly different. > Here is the version I received which SpamCop correctly parses. Abbreviated Received tracelines *comment from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by polecat.worldsocialism.org *serves you from mail.nothingisreal.com [208.97.132.24] by localhost *serves you from (web35715.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.163.179.169]) by randymail-mx2.dreamhost.com *serves you from [128.196.165.21] by web35715.mail.mud.yahoo.com *sourceline SC correctly parses those lines by chaining from each upper 'from' field IP to each lower 'by' field domainname. > Here is the version my employer received which SpamCop doesn't correctly parse. Abbreviated Received tracelines *comment from enforcer.dreamhost.com [66.33.220.4]) by randymail-mx1.dreamhost.com *serves recipient from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by enforcer.dreamhost.com *serves recipient from enforcer.dreamhost.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost *serves recipient from hesl01uker.he.local (smtpout.btconnect.com [213.123.26.90]) by enforcer.dreamhost.com *serves recipient, funky helo from c2bthimr02.btconnect.com ([194.73.73.202]) by hesl01uker.he.local *serves recipient, funky line from (web35715.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.163.179.169]) by c2bthimr02.btconnect.com *serves recipient from [128.196.165.21] by web35715.mail.mud.yahoo.com *sourceline SC incorrectly parses those lines because it breaks the chain prematurely because of the funky 213.123.26.90 rDNS smtpout.btconnect.com which is handling its Received traceline non-compliantly. It is calling itself hesl01uker.he.local in its line that it stamps # 5 from the top and SC cannot associate the IP with that name. As a result, SC cannot get past the IP 213.123.26.90 and 'has to' name it as source. If that recipient were reporting spam with spamcop, they would have to configure themselves with mailhosting, because SC would always name that server as the source of any mail with such headers. In the above headers, the item goes from source 128 > mud.yahoo > btconnect > dreamhost The bad server line belongs to btconnect. In your headers, the item goes from source 128 > dreamhost without the intervening btconnect, so the bad line does not appear in your headers. -- Mike Easter kibitzer, not SC admin