Re: [BRUIT] autoreply
salut à toutes et à tous ;-)
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 12:16:00PM +0100, Amaury Amblard-Ladurantie wrote:
[...]
> cat ~/.procmailrc
> (snip)
>
> :0:
> * ^From.*ya@tiscali.be
> /dev/null
procmail, c'est bien. Mais...
en RTC, ça n'empêche pas la facture d'augmenter !
A moins de l'utiliser sur le serveur, mais, chez Free, je ne sais
pas faire :-(
Comme en plus, c'est un problème que je rencontre ailleurs, j'ai
un petit peu cherché, et voici ce que j'ai trouvé de plus
satisfaisant :
< - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - >
URL: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12525.html
Re: too many "Out of Office AutoReply"
_________________________________________________________________
* To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
* Subject: Re: too many "Out of Office AutoReply"
* From: "Michael H. Warfield" <mhw@wittsend.com>
* Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 15:13:25 -0400
* Cc: A James Lewis <james@FSCK.CO.UK>, ]ietf@ietf.org
* In-Reply-To:
<200106271814.f5RIEGg25616@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu>; from
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu on Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:14:15PM -0400
* References:
<Pine.LNX.4.33.0106271838150.6831-100000@vortex1.vrtx.net>
<200106271814.f5RIEGg25616@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu>
* User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.2i
_________________________________________________________________
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 02:14:15PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2001 18:44:41 BST, A James Lewis <james@fsck.co.uk> said:
> > I notice also that ALL of the autoresponder messages come from "Internet
> > Mail Service" Microsoft software.... No surprises there then!
> I used to send a canned note to people who did that, explaining that it
> was poor netiquette, but gave up when I noticed that:
> (a) 99% of the offenders were using that software
> (b) I have *yet* to find somebody who can tell me how to configure said
> software to not reply to mail that comes from owner-* or *-request addresses.
> If somebody has a "choose this tab, select that, type this" cookbook, please
> let me know....
I went round and round with our people about this (we have over
70 lists with over 50,000 subscribers at Internet Security Systems).
Someone was finally able to tell me that recent versions of Exchange
will not autorespond to messages with Precedence set to "bulk" but will
autorespond to messages with no Precedence setting or with a Precedence
setting of "list". They are keying on the string, not the numeric
value. All of our list messages now go out with the "Precedence: bulk"
header to eliminate that much.
Of the remainder (older versions of Outlook and Exchange), many
violate SEVERAL rules of autoresponders such as never autoresponding
to an autoresponder an responding more that once to a given address.
If you think about it, this is a DoS attack waiting to happen. Just get
a few of these and spoof messages them from each of them. :-) Fundamentally
evil and fundamentally SIMPLE. And, yes, I know of one individual who
actually got fed up with two particular others and did that to them. They
had been warned and they set up the autoresponders anyway. They came
back to over 8,000 messages and mailboxes overlimit. They blamed each other,
of course, and they were right... Just for the wrong reasons. :-)
And, no, it wasn't me that done that.
Recent versions of Outlook, Outlook Express, and Exchange avoid
both of those damaging misbehaviors as well, so it's only chumps^H^H^H^H^H^H
victims^H^H^H^H^H^H^Husers with software that is overdue for an update.
> --
> Valdis Kletnieks
> Operating Systems Analyst
> Virginia Tech
Mike
--
Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw@WittsEnd.com
(The Mad Wizard) | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
_________________________________________________________________
< - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - >
1) la solution est-elle de mettre le champ Precedence à "bulk" ?
Ici, il est à "list".
2) et si l'admin de la liste ne veut pas le faire (expérience vécue),
comment peut-on indiquer (dans les entêtes) qu'on ne veut pas
recevoir ces messages *non sollicités* et sans intérêt sur les listes ?
Le mettre à "bulk" ne sert à rien car le gestionnaire de liste
l'écrase alors, pour le mettre à la valeur qu'il veut ("list").
J'ai testé !
--
Philippe BOURCIER http://bourcier.philippe.online.fr
Reply to: