[H-GEN] Open source firm releases patch for IE spoofing flaw

[Robert Brockway]

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Greg Black wrote:

> Anybody who wants such a feature can add it with a trivial
> procmail recipe; this is, after all, the way that Unix users

I use procmail a bit but don't consider myself a guru by any stretch of
the imagination.  I decided to take up this challenge to produce a
procmail rule to add a Reply-To header for mail coming from General or
Chat.

Greg was right, it wasn't hard although it was fiddly.

The longest time was spent waiting for some chat traffic to come through
(those joke files of mine were cleverly disguised tests ;)  For those
wondering I did test offline first but there were a few minor kinks to get
out :)

Ok first off let me say that no one should ever, ever!, add a procmail
rule to a live mail account without testing it first.  It's too easy to
end up in a situation which will bring you to tears.  The procmailex man
page contains info on how to setup a "safety net" but I recommend a
dedicated test account.

Note: This worked for me.  That is all I'll guarantee.  It is a simple
rule and should work for you too.

Here are the rules I added to ~/.procmailrc to set a Reply-To header for
the lists:

# Add Reply-To to HUMBUG General list
:0 cfw
* ^X-BeenThere:.*general at lists.humbug.org.au.*
| formail -a "Reply-To: general at lists.humbug.org.au"

# Add Reply-To to HUMBUG Chat list
:0 cfw
* ^X-BeenThere:.*chat at lists.humbug.org.au.*
| formail -a "Reply-To: chat at lists.humbug.org.au"

As to using procmail, that's outside the scope of my mail.  You could use
it as a local delivery agent as I do, or access it via a .forward file (as
I used to do) or other ways depending on the MTA (sendmail, postfix, etc)
that you use.

Good luck.

Rob

-- 
Robert Brockway B.Sc. email: robert at timetraveller.org, zzbrock at uqconnect.net
Linux counter project ID #16440 (http://counter.li.org)
"The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens" -Baha'u'llah