| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
JohnA
Sergeant

 Joined: Mar 15, 2003 Posts: 91 Location: United States
|
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:42 am Post subject: Suggestion to make "undelete" work with more ISPs |
|
|
When I try and recover deleted messages, the message is mailed back to me. Unfortunately, the server recognizes that the mail was sent once and refuses to deliver it to me with the error:
>> This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)
Sure enough, the deleted message has a Delivered-To line in the header. It would be nice if MailWasher could remove that line before resending the message?
I've been told that MailWasher only deals with "standard" mail header lines so they might not want to do this. I would think, however, that MailWasher would prefer to have a feature such as "undelete" which would work with the most mail servers possible rather than being a purist working with a smaller fraction.
I've also been told that changing the header is forbidden... but I wonder if that includes mail server directives for detecting mail looping...
-- John
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stan_qaz
Premium Member
 Joined: Mar 31, 2003 Posts: 10635
|
Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As was pointed out in the other topic trying to deal with ISPs misconfigured mail servers would become a real nightmare.
If you restore the mail to a free e-mail account on Yahoo or Google that should fix the problem. _________________ Questions? Try the wiki
http://wiki.castlecops.com/MailWasher_Pro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JohnA
Sergeant

 Joined: Mar 15, 2003 Posts: 91 Location: United States
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stan_qaz wrote: | As was pointed out in the other topic trying to deal with ISPs misconfigured mail servers would become a real nightmare.
If you restore the mail to a free e-mail account on Yahoo or Google that should fix the problem. |
Yes, I figured a work around - problem is that my free accounts all forward so they end up with the same problem. Only exception was an account that did not forward but would not let me use them to send undeleted mail directly. I ended up "undeleting" using my ISPs server (not the mail server adding the "Delivered-To:" line) but using the email address for the account that did not forward. That worked fine...
I must say, however, that this is the second feature that for one reason or another didn't work (the other was bounce which I don't use). If users end up not being able to perform tasks because of their ISP, in the long run I would think this will limit the people using the product. I don't think the "Delivered To:" trick is that uncommon - and having seen many ISPs loop delivering mail, I can understand why they do it. Too many times network application programmers say: "it's not in the spec" and end up shooting themselves. I can remember long ago when Unix did some things that were in violation of the RFCs but we had to address it in our software if we wanted to talk with a major portion of the world. Interoperability is very important too.
-- John
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stan_qaz
Premium Member
 Joined: Mar 31, 2003 Posts: 10635
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JohnA
Sergeant

 Joined: Mar 15, 2003 Posts: 91 Location: United States
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stan_qaz wrote: | MW's forging (fake bounce) of e-mail headers should not work if an ISP has their servers correctly configured.
The only thing worse is having it work and then getting caught forging headers and getting your ISP account closed for mail abuse. |
That sounds great (we've actually had this discussion years ago and I don't want to repeat it), but it's an advertised feature of MailWasher Pro:
| Quote: | Any email you bounce back puts that senders details on your Blacklist, allowing easy removal if you receive more emails from them.
You can even set MailWasher® Pro to automatically bounce and delete blacklisted email. Plus, MailWasher® Pro uses external blacklists, such as ORDB and SpamCop or your can specify your own. |
So of course what happens if someone buys MW for that feature? Are they supposed to feel happy about the product?
-- John
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stan_qaz
Premium Member
 Joined: Mar 31, 2003 Posts: 10635
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hopefully they won't be as ticked at Firetrust as I was when my ISP gave me a turn off notice if I forged one more bounce! They should be a bit upset though as the bounce promotion is very misleading.
I wish I or someone here could think of a clean solution to the looping problem that was likely to get implemented.
As far as fixes that probably won't be implemented go...
Sending the deleted mail as an attachment to a new message would be the simple fix. However, there has been an outstanding suggestion to send several spamcop reports as attachemnts to a single message to cut down on the multiple confirmation messages for a long time now. _________________ Questions? Try the wiki
http://wiki.castlecops.com/MailWasher_Pro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BuckeyeBasser
SRT Trainee
 Premium Member
 Joined: May 01, 2006 Posts: 692 Location: Central Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | So of course what happens if someone buys MW for that feature? Are they supposed to feel happy about the product? |
The vast majority of us in this forum are not officially connected to FireTrust in any way other than being a customer. Most of us have petitioned FireTrust repeatedly, consistently, and thoroughly to remove the bounce function entirely. Obviously they have not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BuckeyeBasser
SRT Trainee
 Premium Member
 Joined: May 01, 2006 Posts: 692 Location: Central Ohio, USA
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I wish I or someone here could think of a clean solution to the looping problem that was likely to get implemented. |
Sending the deleted message as an attachment would solve the problem.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JohnA
Sergeant

 Joined: Mar 15, 2003 Posts: 91 Location: United States
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BuckeyeBasser wrote: | | The vast majority of us in this forum are not officially connected to FireTrust in any way other than being a customer. |
Of course a forum called "Product Suggestions" has no meaning unless the vendor is part of the process - I had assumed posts here were reviewed in some fashion by Firetrust.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stan_qaz
Premium Member
 Joined: Mar 31, 2003 Posts: 10635
|
Posted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Several Firetrust employees visit and respond here.
Some are: rusticdog, gingbat, sighthound, booboo
Who am I forgetting? _________________ Questions? Try the wiki
http://wiki.castlecops.com/MailWasher_Pro
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ikeb
Special Response Team Forums Admin
 Joined: Apr 20, 2003 Posts: 16535
|
Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know you're forgetting someone ... but then they aren't here very often so why should we be expected to have instant recall eh?
Ah, there you go: FireTrust Hosts
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rusticdog
Site Moderator Premium Member
 Joined: Aug 12, 2002 Posts: 5850 Location: New_Zealand
|
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2006 5:28 am Post subject: Re: Suggestion to make "undelete" work with more I |
|
|
| JohnA wrote: | When I try and recover deleted messages, the message is mailed back to me. Unfortunately, the server recognizes that the mail was sent once and refuses to deliver it to me with the error:
>> This message is looping: it already has my Delivered-To line. (#5.4.6)
Sure enough, the deleted message has a Delivered-To line in the header. It would be nice if MailWasher could remove that line before resending the message? |
This should be addressed in the next release, I recall a beta tester having the same issue, which we've corrected by removing the Delivered-To line.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JohnA
Sergeant

 Joined: Mar 15, 2003 Posts: 91 Location: United States
|
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2006 2:51 am Post subject: Re: Suggestion to make "undelete" work with more I |
|
|
| rusticdog wrote: | | This should be addressed in the next release, I recall a beta tester having the same issue, which we've corrected by removing the Delivered-To line. |
Sounds great! Thanks very much for letting me know... can you say when we can expect the next release?
-- John
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rusticdog
Site Moderator Premium Member
 Joined: Aug 12, 2002 Posts: 5850 Location: New_Zealand
|
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:52 pm Post subject: Re: Suggestion to make "undelete" work with more I |
|
|
| JohnA wrote: | | rusticdog wrote: | | This should be addressed in the next release, I recall a beta tester having the same issue, which we've corrected by removing the Delivered-To line. |
Sounds great! Thanks very much for letting me know... can you say when we can expect the next release?
-- John |
I would have thought before year end, but now with Vista being shipped January it will be after this, as we still have some minor tweaks to make for Vista. The current version 5.3 runs fine with Vista, but any other version needs alterations.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SpeedTrap
Cadet

 Joined: Apr 08, 2006 Posts: 8 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:13 pm Post subject: Restoring email |
|
|
I've been usng MWP for years and I don't understand why one must have an email resent to restore it. Most of the time, when I want to restore an email, I'm simply interested in the textual components (headers and body), not in any icons, graphics, etc.
To that end, I would think that an option for the restore would be to export to a file eliminating all of the problems incountered with using the current mechanism.
Cheers
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|