Majordomo-Users: Re: Taboo or not Taboo?

Majordomo-Users
(September 1998)

Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject:	Re: Taboo or not Taboo?
From:	Ben Smithurst <ben @ scientia . demon . co . uk>
Date:	Mon, 14 Sep 1998 16:34:55 +0100
To:	"St.Einar" <st . einar @ bigfoot . com>, Majordomo Mailing List <majordomo-users @ greatcircle . com>
In-reply-to:	<000d01bddf45$664e8000$040a4382@st.einar>
References:	<000d01bddf45$664e8000$040a4382@st.einar>
User-agent:	Mutt/0.94.3i (FreeBSD 3.0-CURRENT i386)

St.Einar wrote:

>   Since "subscribe_policy = open" the spammer can resubscribe and then
>   spam again. Can I use the "taboo_body" or "taboo_headers"? What is the
>   syntax for banning spammer@scammer.net?
> 
>   Is it:
> 
>   taboo_body
>   spammer@scammer.net 
>   END

It goes in  taboo_headers:

/^from:.*spammer\@scammer\.net/i

or something. If your MTA adds Return-Path to messages delivered through
a pipe, you could also check on the envelope return address:

/^return-path: <spammer@scammer\.net>$/i

-- 
Ben Smithurst : ben@scientia.demon.co.uk : http://www.scientia.demon.co.uk/

PGP: 0x99392F7D - 3D 89 87 42 CE CA 93 4C  68 32 0E D5 36 05 3D 16
     http://www.scientia.demon.co.uk/ben/pgp-key.html (or use keyservers)

References:

Taboo or not Taboo?
From: "St.Einar" <st.einar@bigfoot.com>

Indexed By Date	Previous:	Re: authentication (fwd) From: "Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@amethyst.nstc.com>
Indexed By Date	Next:	Re: authentication (fwd) From: Ben Smithurst <ben@scientia.demon.co.uk>
Indexed By Thread	Previous:	Taboo or not Taboo? From: "St.Einar" <st.einar@bigfoot.com>
Indexed By Thread	Next:	authentication (fwd) From: Roddy Strachan <roddy@satlink.com.au>