dg@lakart.UUCP (David Goodenough) (11/29/88)
From article <913@tank.uchicago.edu>, by matt@oddjob.uchicago.edu (Matt Crawford): > ..... stuff deleted ...... > To the return-path on outgoing mail, I prepend "oddjob!" if there already > is a fully-qualified name in the path or "oddjob!oddjob.uchicago.edu!" > if there isn't. One of my MAJOR bitches about uucp is that it seems impossible to get mail anywhere with a sensible return path. For example I occasionally try to tweak an Internet server that requires a valid Internet return path. I know that: dg%lakart.uucp@harvard.harvard.edu will hit me from Internetland, but it seems that along the way some mailers have a tendancy to add extra stuff onto the start of this. Is there any way to get them to LEAVE IT THE HELL ALONE. I am relying on one thing and one thing only: harvard.harvard.edu knows how to get stuff to dg@lakart.uucp, however if someone turns this into: zort!dg%lakart.uucp@harvard.harvard.edu then it winds up with a bang path: ....!lakart!zort!dg which isn't going to get anywhere. I.e. is there a return address field in mail headers that is guaranteed not to be screwed with by anybody, and if not WHY NOT? -- dg@lakart.UUCP - David Goodenough +---+ | +-+-+ ....... !harvard!xait!lakart!dg +-+-+ | AKA: dg%lakart.uucp@harvard.harvard.edu +---+
chip@ateng.ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) (12/01/88)
According to dg@lakart.UUCP (David Goodenough): >One of my MAJOR bitches about uucp is that it seems impossible to get mail >anywhere with a sensible return path. [...] > >I know that <dg%lakart.uucp@harvard.harvard.edu> >will hit me from Internetland, but it seems that along the way some mailers >have a tendancy to add extra stuff onto the start of this. Is there any >way to get them to LEAVE IT THE HELL ALONE. UUCP is only a transport, like SMTP, and has nothing to do with your gripe. Your problem is twofold: 1. Sendmail includes the ability to arbitrarily rewrite addresses, even valid ones; this is Evil and Rude. 2. Postmasters who don't realize that (1) is Evil and Rude, and who don't reconfigure Sendmail to get rid of it. Sites running Smail (any flavor) or a stock System V or Xenix mail system will not rewrite your addresses. (Or at least they won't prepend their site names to a <user@host> address. Smail 3.1 will prepend the site name to a pure bang path, but I think that's harmless.) Complain to the postmasters at the Evil and Rude sites. They may listen. -- Chip Salzenberg <chip@ateng.com> or <uunet!ateng!chip> A T Engineering Me? Speak for my company? Surely you jest! Beware of programmers carrying screwdrivers.
lear@NET.BIO.NET (Eliot Lear) (12/03/88)
The problem is that .UUCP is a magic cookie for certain sendmail configurations, and they do not handle the case correctly. It is not uncommon to find a rule that does something like the following: given user%host.uucp@host, convert to host!user@host. This gives mailers ample opportunity to screw up precedence of ! and @. Aside from the rabidity of Chip's tone, I would agree that sendmail.cfs can be abused. This is mostly due to a lack of understanding of the consequences that occur when changes are made. It is often said that the CF creeping featurism. HOWEVER. The above isn't a good enough reason to dismiss the CF. The problem is that we exist in a heterogenious environment, and the configurability is necessary. -- Eliot Lear [lear@net.bio.net]