Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:33:05 +1000
From:      Andrew Reilly <areilly@bigpond.net.au>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   What's happening to Sender: headers?
Message-ID:  <C608E59C-C231-493D-A744-E448BBB92C75@bigpond.net.au>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi all,

I can=E2=80=99t think of anywhere else to ask, but this knowledgeable =
group is as likely as any to know what=E2=80=99s going on, I think.

For years and years I=E2=80=99ve been able to filter all of my FreeBSD =
mailing list messages into a separate FreeBSD inbox with a pair of =
simple dovecot-sieve rules:

   if address :matches "Sender" "*owner@freebsd.org"    { fileinto =
"in.freebsd"; }
elsif address :matches "Sender" "owner*@freebsd.org"    { fileinto =
"in.freebsd"; }

(=E2=80=A6 and similarly for most of my other mailing lists).  The =
Sender header is (used to be) a reliable reflection of the envelope FROM =
address, which reliably tied things to the email server sending the list =
messages.

On about the 11th or 12th of April, a significant chunk of FreeBSD =
mailing list messages, including especially the git commit messages, =
started showing up in my normal INBOX, evading the filter rules.

Over the weekend I got around to investigating, and discovered that the =
errant messages don=E2=80=99t _have_ a Sender: header.  There=E2=80=99s =
a Return-Path: header that captures the envelope-from, but I haven=E2=80=99=
t figured out how to make sieve check that yet: it doesn=E2=80=99t seem =
to like it.  Sieve documentation is spectacularly inconclusive, but I =
suspect that the envelope extension might do what I want, but that=E2=80=99=
s not really my question.

Does anyone know why the Sender: header, which used to be so reliable =
that I had thought it an intrinsic part of the SMTP/MTA ecosystem, has =
gone away, or is at least not ubiquitous?

I=E2=80=99m running dovecot and pigeonhole and postfix from ports, on =
stable/14 and feeding messages in using fetchmail rather than direct =
SMTP: I=E2=80=99ve found that exposing an SMTP endpoint requires more =
anti-spam fu than I've been prepared to muster so far.  Using fetchmail =
is clunky but it keeps me behind my ISP=E2=80=99s spam filter.

Cheers,

Andrew




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?C608E59C-C231-493D-A744-E448BBB92C75>