AOL will allow the information in a footer, but that makes for much more
overhead (and hard to do in Mailman if you have HTML messages.) The
information is still available from AOL, they just made it harder to get.
Here is AOL's postmaster blog link on the issue.
http://journals.aol.com/pmtjournal/blog/entries/2008/08/13/more-on-the-upcoming-feedback-loop-conversion/3001.
Since people report even individual emails sent only to them as SPAM -
accidentally or on purpose, doing it in the MTA is much more effective.
Every list gets SPAM complaints, well-run or not. Ask the moderators here or
any other list. People are both lazy and can hit the SPAM button as it is
next to the Delete button accidentally. (Incidentally, if my lists were
not well-run, AOL would not still have me whitelisted. That is not an easy
task to be whitelisted and have it for several years.)
I use Mailman - just like this list. It does not have a fingerprinting
capability, that is why I asked here for help. Trying to add it will create
quite a bit of overhead, and then would not be able to check the origin of
non-mailing list messages. Doing it in Exim would make life easier and
then would cover all emails sent from the server.
BTW - you can only get an individual id in the maillog - as it is created by
Exim. MLM logs never have that - just as you sending an email from your
own personal computer to more than one person does not have the individual
queue id. The message id you have, but that would be the same for all
people on your distribution, just like it is for all emails on a mailing
list.
Example the ID you machine used when sending the reply was
Message-ID: <48E842B1.2020103@???>
That id would be the same for every person who received this email on the
list.
The id from exim.org is:
(envelope-from <exim-users-bounces@???>)
id 1KmLFc-0000JE-OQ;
That id is only for me.
Here is comment from the creator/programmer of Mailman, Brad Knowles :
"Personally, I'm about ready to get together with a few other people and
rewrite the RFC describing the ARF format, and update it such that you
cannot possibly be compliant with the 2.0 format if you redact any
information whatsoever. Then the entire Internet can beat the holy living
crap out of them for not being 2.0 format compliant.
And I say this as the former Sr. Internet Administrator for AOL.
--
Brad Knowles "
and you see what he used to do for a living at AOL.
Oh, and thank you for taking the time to look at my website, Bill. I
appreciate your response, and giving me the chance to make my request
clearer.
----- Original Message -----
From: W B Hacker <wbh@???>
To: exim users <exim-users@???>
Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 12:29:37 +0800
Subject: Re: [exim] Looking to Create and Addtional Header Record to Solve
AOL Redaction Problems
> Lloyd Tennison wrote:
> > The problem is with AOL's new policy for their feedback loop program that
> > took effect September 1st. For the last several years of the program, if
> > someone reported an email as SPAM, AOL sent a copy of that email,
complete
> > with headers, with the AOL member's address that reported the email as
> > SPAM.
> >
> > Now, they redact that email address. They redact the username. They
redact
> > anything they think could be the username. (Including mailing list
headers
> > like Mailman - with full VERP.)
>
> On the face of it, it seems to be a prudent move on AOL's part toward
> reducing the chance the 'whistleblower' is retaliated against.
>
> Not an unreasonable choice.
>
> > This makes it more difficult to remove
> > people who decided they no longer wanted to receive the email and were
too
> > lazy to unsubscribe.
> >
>
> Not sure that is relevant.
>
> If a list was genuinely of-interest, and opt-in, and remains well-run,
> it should be less hassle to a user to unsubscribe than to file a spam
> report.
>
> > Many other ISP's offer similar services, (Microsoft/Hotmail/MSN, Comcast,
> > Excite, Road Runner, etc.) but they include the full headers unredacted,
> > just as AOL did for years. The feedback loop is a requirement of being
> > whitelisted with AOL - so it is a necessary and valuable tool - at least
it
> > was. Now to use it one must search exim_mainlog for the id of the email
> > that was sent to the AOL member.
> >
>
> A) Easily automated
>
> B) Exim's mainlog is not the best place to look
>
> Where you want to grep is in the *MLM* logs and/or archives.
>
> There will be far few entries to scan, as you start with only the
> specific list and time-frame in question, not all traffic in both
> directions.
>
> > Being able to obfuscate, or easily encrypt on send and decrypt on receive
> > would save a great deal of time.
>
> Not an Exim issue.
>
> Work with your MLM software. It can easily add recipient-unique and
> poster-unique 'fingerprints' - coded or otherwise - that will almost
> certainly survive redaction.
>
> Not limited to placement in headers. Message-body head and foot add-ins
> work too.
>
> > It also makes staying whitelisted easier,
> > and my servers staying whitelisted is very important to me.
> >
>
> If you are getting blacklisted (or de-whitelisted) it is the
> maintainer/user/abuser of the particular list in question you need to
> 'educate'.
>
> And of course, insuring that the lists are configured to prevent
> outsiders posting spam.
>
> The real-time 'QC' copies you get of activity for every list you host
> should keep you well ahead of all that before you have a need to de-code
> an AOL report.
>
> If you are NOT seeing copies of posts, errors, moderation, sub/unsub and
> confirmations, then your 'VIP' list is not getting as much attention as
> the average university, social club, or other 'volunteer-operated' list.
>
> Nursemaiding an MLM is not a 'fire and forget' business.
>
> Bill
>
>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: W B Hacker <wbh@???>
> > To: exim users <exim-users@???>
> > Date: Sun, 05 Oct 2008 09:24:49 +0800
> > Subject: Re: [exim] Looking to Create and Addtional Header Record to
Solve
> > AOL Redaction Problems
> >
> >> Lloyd Tennison wrote:
> >>> Based on To: . Because of AOL redacting email addresses from SPAM
> > reports,
> >>> I thought that if a new Envelope-to: (different name) was added, and
the
> >>> user name was split into pieces and then added some weird characters in
> > the
> >>> middle, AOL (and others) would not be able to redact. (From an earlier
> >>> thread, Envelope-To would probably not work.)
> >>>
> >>> Example:
> >>>
> >>> Call the new header X-Ref
> >>>
> >>> X-Ref: exiqwerm-uqwersrs@???
> >>>
> >>> X-Ref: exim-users@???
> >>>
> >>> This would then work for both mailing lists and individual messages.
Any
> >>> thoughts on this? Other options also solicited.
> >>>
> >> ??
> >>
> >> Not exactly sure what 'problem' this is intended to resolve.
> >>
> >> Or why it is seen to be necessary. Or assumed to 'work'.
> >>
> >> Background? Environment? Goals?
> >>
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
> >> ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
> >> ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> ## List details at http://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
> ## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
> ## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/
>
