-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday 11 November 2001 12:32 am, Shaul Karl wrote: > >Before that I wrote ... > > Using kmail, if I get some spam mail, I hit control B which is supposed > > to send a bounce message back to the sender. This pops up a warning > > dialog with the mail address of who it is going to send the bounce > > message to.
Maybe its kmail that has changed! > > > > All of a sudden last week I noticed that hitting control B was no longer > > giving mail address of where the message had originally come from, but > > was instead reporting that it would try and bounce the message to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Looking at the headers of the message I > > am trying to about does indeed have > > > > Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I've checked out exim and it does this (and as far as I can see is supposed to) > > > > My question - when did this change take place - is it an update to debian > > /etc/init.d/fetchmail - which seems to now set the user id to "fetchmail" > > before running the daemon (did it do this before?) or fetchmail itself? Again I have had double read of the man page which seems to say this is correct - if its run as user fetchmail it uses itself as sender. > > The Return-path on my system looks O.K. > Does the [EMAIL PROTECTED] Return-path appears on non > spam messages too? I haven't properly got to the bottom of this yet. Exim docs says that the RFC says the last link in the chain should add a return path message although it is unclear as to what this does. My check of the exim.conf file is that when its doing a local delivery thats what it does. It seems that kmail is using it as the address for bounce messages now (but not before?). > As far as I can tell, fetchmail works according to /etc/fetchmailrc and > /etc/default/fetchmail. Could it be that those config files tell > fetchmail to rewrite the mail headers? Maybe the MDA is somehow > involved in this headers rewrite? Fetchmail does write some headers but not the return path - although it refers to RCPT TO header- is this the same? - -- Alan - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.chandlerfamily.org.uk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE77dl81mf3M5ZDr2kRAhA2AJ4nc6HzDk5yAd1/XLRcfl8PALd52wCfdveQ hQSlsjfmqHh1G5uqpnvLGKo= =kPMI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
