IIRC you have good knowledge of procmail.

I am currently working on a new project for the YAMN
Network and I got stuck with procmail and wonder if
this is possible.

I have created a recipe which scans the mail body
of incomming mail and then does replace with sed
some content so that the output of sed can be saved
as new message.

My goal however is that the modified message gets
not saved and instead should be piped to a sendmail
like program as new message.

The hole procedure should act as gateway, say for example
I could use an email provider like Gmail and send from
Gmail's web interface my message to an m2n Gateway,
knowing that Gmail does not provide extra email Header
settings, so that they must be included in the parsed message
body.

The propblem I have is that the recipe is working, i.e. saving the
sed output to a file, but fpiping the sed output to a sendmail like
program does not work.

I also must admit I am no procmail user and therfore lack
the knowledge.

And advise or help would be much appreciated.

Regards
Stefan

On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 09:15:24 -0700 (PDT), LO AND BEHOLD; Stefan Claas
<spam.trap.usenet@gmail.com> determined that the following was of great
importance and subsequently decided to freely share it with us in
<05951731-43d0-4755-a28d-2ed7f91c6322n@googlegroups.com>:
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= IIRC you have good knowledge of procmail.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= I am currently working on a new project for the YAMN Network and I got
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= stuck with procmail and wonder if this is possible.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= I have created a recipe which scans the mail body of incomming mail and
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= then does replace with sed some content so that the output of sed can
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= be saved as new message.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= My goal however is that the modified message gets not saved and instead
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= should be piped to a sendmail like program as new message.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= The hole procedure should act as gateway, say for example I could use an
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= email provider like Gmail and send from Gmail's web interface my
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= message to an m2n Gateway, knowing that Gmail does not provide extra
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= email Header settings, so that they must be included in the parsed
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= message body.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= The propblem I have is that the recipe is working, i.e. saving the sed
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= output to a file, but fpiping the sed output to a sendmail like program
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= does not work.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= I also must admit I am no procmail user and therfore lack the knowledge.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= And advise or help would be much appreciated.
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?= Regards Stefan
=?UTF-8?B?8J+Ps++4j+KAjfCfjIg=?=

write a bash script that does the correct piping and redirection and then call that from procmail.

"√? out of 0 pet rocks" can't DIVISION BY ZERO...

--
[THIS POAST HAS PASSED TRIMCHECK® VALIDATION]

On 9/6/21 10:15 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
> IIRC you have good knowledge of procmail.

I use procmail. I don't know that I'm a master of it. I have 594
active recipes. ;-)

> My goal however is that the modified message gets not saved and
> instead should be piped to a sendmail like program as new message.

This is definitely possible.

> The hole procedure should act as gateway, say for example I could use
> an email provider like Gmail and send from Gmail's web interface my
> message to an m2n Gateway, knowing that Gmail does not provide extra
> email Header settings, so that they must be included in the parsed
> message body.

Please read about and use the Auto-Submitted: header. I'd expect
something like what you're talking about would use the "Auto-Submitted:
auto-generated" header. -- It's one of those things to do to make the
email cleaner.

> The propblem I have is that the recipe is working, i.e. saving the
> sed output to a file, but fpiping the sed output to a sendmail like
> program does not work.

As Jen Dershm suggested, I'd do this as a separate script that procmail
delivers the message to. This has two primary benefits:

1) You aren't limited to actions that procmail can do native.
2) You inherently don't have copies of the original message hanging around.

> I also must admit I am no procmail user and therfore lack the
> knowledge.

That's what questions are for. ;-

> And advise or help would be much appreciated.

See the sample / minimal recipe that matches something and delivers the
message into a script.

Please add the Auto-Submitted: header.

Finally, you might consider (ab)using the List-* headers, mainly
List-Help: or List-Owner: headers, as a way to direct humans to
communicate with you as the operator of this gateway. }:-)

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On Monday, September 6, 2021 at 8:03:07 PM UTC+2, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 9/6/21 10:15 AM, Stefan Claas wrote:
> > IIRC you have good knowledge of procmail.
> I use procmail. I don't know that I'm a master of it. I have 594
> active recipes. ;-)

Oh. :-)

> > My goal however is that the modified message gets not saved and
> > instead should be piped to a sendmail like program as new message.
> This is definitely possible.

Thanks.

> > The hole procedure should act as gateway, say for example I could use
> > an email provider like Gmail and send from Gmail's web interface my
> > message to an m2n Gateway, knowing that Gmail does not provide extra
> > email Header settings, so that they must be included in the parsed
> > message body.
> Please read about and use the Auto-Submitted: header. I'd expect
> something like what you're talking about would use the "Auto-Submitted:
> auto-generated" header. -- It's one of those things to do to make the
> email cleaner.

Well, email is send to the gateway but regular email is not comming out
with all its headers, because it is p2p.

> > The propblem I have is that the recipe is working, i.e. saving the
> > sed output to a file, but fpiping the sed output to a sendmail like
> > program does not work.
> As Jen Dershm suggested, I'd do this as a separate script that procmail
> delivers the message to. This has two primary benefits:
>
> 1) You aren't limited to actions that procmail can do native.
> 2) You inherently don't have copies of the original message hanging around.

Thanks for explaining!

> > I also must admit I am no procmail user and therfore lack the
> > knowledge.
> That's what questions are for. ;-
> > And advise or help would be much appreciated.
> See the sample / minimal recipe that matches something and delivers the
> message into a script.
>
> Please add the Auto-Submitted: header.
>
> Finally, you might consider (ab)using the List-* headers, mainly
> List-Help: or List-Owner: headers, as a way to direct humans to
> communicate with you as the operator of this gateway. }:-)

Thanks for the detailed reply.

What my idea is:

Use an MTA which only can handle incomming emails, restrict
with transport maps which exit can send to the gateway and
then send the emails via procmail to the notbit Bitmessage CLI client,
which then sends the messages into Bitmessage chans or addresses.

The reason for this would be that people can use Bitmessage than
to receive Mixmaster or YAMN messages to their address or to post
in chans via Remailers.

Regards
Stefan

On 9/6/21 12:47 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
> Thanks.

You're welcome.

> Well, email is send to the gateway but regular email is not comming
> out with all its headers, because it is p2p.

Ah.

> Thanks for explaining!

:-)

> Thanks for the detailed reply.

You're welcome.

> What my idea is:
>
> Use an MTA which only can handle incomming emails, restrict with
> transport maps which exit can send to the gateway and then send the
> emails via procmail to the notbit Bitmessage CLI client, which then
> sends the messages into Bitmessage chans or addresses.
>
> The reason for this would be that people can use Bitmessage than to
> receive Mixmaster or YAMN messages to their address or to post in
> chans via Remailers.

*nod*

That seems reasonable to me.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On Monday, September 6, 2021 at 9:13:05 PM UTC+2, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 9/6/21 12:47 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
maps which exit can send to the gateway and then send the
> > emails via procmail to the notbit Bitmessage CLI client, which then
> > sends the messages into Bitmessage chans or addresses.
> >
> > The reason for this would be that people can use Bitmessage than to
> > receive Mixmaster or YAMN messages to their address or to post in
> > chans via Remailers.
> *nod*
>
> That seems reasonable to me.

There exists, as you may know, Peter Surda's mailchuck.com, which
is software for an (paid) bidirectional email2bitmessage gateway
and this software, without payment, is also freely available, but I
do not have the balls to run this software for the whole world and
I do not know how one could restrict submission for only exit Remailers
and how remops would be able to subcribe to the gateway, with their
Remailer usage email addresses. This gateway also needs catch-all
email setting in postfix, which I am not familiar with. Hence the reason
to try something similiar and not so dangerous*, with the notbit client.

*mailchuck.com had years ago an FBI visit.

Regards
Stefan

On 9/6/21 1:28 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:
> There exists, as you may know, Peter Surda's mailchuck.com, which is
> software for an (paid) bidirectional email2bitmessage gateway and
> this software, without payment, is also freely available,

I know of it.

> I do not have the balls to run this software for the whole world

~chuckle~

I don't blame you. That's why I'm only running middle remailers.

I want to contribute to the community, but I'm not willing to risk the
rest of my infrastructure to do so.

> I do not know how one could restrict submission for only exit Remailers
> and how remops would be able to subcribe to the gateway, with their
> Remailer usage email addresses.

I don't think that restricting submission from only exit remailers would
be sufficient. After all, it's trivial to send a message through the
remailer network to the gateway and come out from an exit remailer. ;-)

I think that you would need to do something else to ensure that it
wasn't abused. About the only thing that comes to mind, especially for
things passing through the remailer network, is to leverage encryption.
E.g. encrypt messages with /your/ /own/ private key and configure the
gateway such that it will only handle messages that it has public keys
to decrypt. But ... that is both more complex and introduces
(effectively) irrefutable proof of who sent the message, which is
against the overall spirit of the task / community.

> This gateway also needs catch-all email setting in postfix, which I
> am not familiar with. Hence the reason to try something similiar and
> not so dangerous*, with the notbit client.

I don't know how to do a catch-all email address in Postfix. But I know
that it's fairly trivial in Sendmail. Seeing as how Postfix is
considered simpler to configure than Sendmail, I would expect that a
catch-all in Postfix to be relatively simple.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On Monday, September 6, 2021 at 11:03:47 PM UTC+2, Grant Taylor wrote:
> On 9/6/21 1:28 PM, Stefan Claas wrote:

> > I do not know how one could restrict submission for only exit Remailers
> > and how remops would be able to subcribe to the gateway, with their
> > Remailer usage email addresses.
> I don't think that restricting submission from only exit remailers would
> be sufficient. After all, it's trivial to send a message through the
> remailer network to the gateway and come out from an exit remailer. ;-)
>
> I think that you would need to do something else to ensure that it
> wasn't abused. About the only thing that comes to mind, especially for
> things passing through the remailer network, is to leverage encryption.
> E.g. encrypt messages with /your/ /own/ private key and configure the
> gateway such that it will only handle messages that it has public keys
> to decrypt. But ... that is both more complex and introduces
> (effectively) irrefutable proof of who sent the message, which is
> against the overall spirit of the task / community.

The above would only apply if I would run the freely available Mailchuck
gateway, which could cause trouble, but with my little hack and humble
approach it would not 'hurt' the ouside world, because Remailer messages
used for abuse would only land in chans which I can define or to addresses,
which users would freely publish on the Internet.

> > This gateway also needs catch-all email setting in postfix, which I
> > am not familiar with. Hence the reason to try something similiar and
> > not so dangerous*, with the notbit client.
> I don't know how to do a catch-all email address in Postfix. But I know
> that it's fairly trivial in Sendmail. Seeing as how Postfix is
> considered simpler to configure than Sendmail, I would expect that a
> catch-all in Postfix to be relatively simple.

Ah, ok. Thanks. Good thing is I do not need it for my little gatway later. :-)

Regards and good night
Stefan

On Tuesday, September 7, 2021 at 1:32:19 AM UTC+2, Stefan Claas wrote:

> Ah, ok. Thanks. Good thing is I do not need it for my little gatway later. :-)
>
> Regards and good night
> Stefan

P.S. just send three messages to the chan 'test', in case someone has
subscribed to this chan. Let's see if they arrive, with my little hack.
If not, then tommorow debugging.

Good Night
Stefan

> I don't know how to do a catch-all email address in Postfix. But I know
> that it's fairly trivial in Sendmail. Seeing as how Postfix is
> considered simpler to configure than Sendmail, I would expect that a
> catch-all in Postfix to be relatively simple.

Do you mean the luser_relay feature?
https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/postfix-the-definitive/0596002122/re56.html

I used this years ago for catching phishing attempts:
1) mail to unknown user
2) in html
3) containing link where the displayed text starts http
4) and link followed is not link displayed

I foolishly put no rate limit on what I was reporting to the
phishing sites and got 16k in 12 hours.