About Archive Tags RSS Feed


Entries tagged namecheck

I want to be remembered

26 April 2008 21:50

So I've made a new release of sift, the IMAP client/toy.

I think I named this one after looking up synonyms of "sieve", or "filter". Can't recall now.

The next time I release a toy application, tool, or hack, I will take the time to sit down and write namecheck. (Update: Too easy. Done.)

Here's what it looks like / how it should work:

skx@gold:~$ namecheck namecheck
Testing        freshmeat.net - Available
Testing      sourceforge.net - Available
Testing    alioth.debian.org - Available
Testing      code.google.com - Available
Testing     savannah.gnu.org - Available

Name is currently not claimed

I guess it just comes down to having a list of URLs and patterns to test for:

http://freshmeat.net/projects/%s     | We encounted an error
http://sourceforge.net/projects/%s   | Invalid Project
http://alioth.debian.org/projects/%s | Invalid Project

A tool like that would be useful if you're bad at picking names for projects and want a reasonable chance of uniqueness. Looking up sites by hand is just fiddly and repetitive.

Of course "namecheck" is a provisional title; until it may be used to test that its own name is not in use ;)

Today I shall be mostly smoking, drinking, and trying to fix a dying steam engine. Good times.

ObQuote: Brief Encounter

Update: Quick hack: namecheck | future home in ~/bin/.



They look like big, good, strong hands, don't they?

22 December 2008 21:50

Russ Allbery recently commented that it is really nice to receive patches for trivial scripts posted online.

I agree.

More than once I've posted a trivial script and had it be improved by people, or later included elsewhere.

So in the spirit of sharing here is my latest toy script:

This is a trivial script which searches a Maildir hierarchy and outputs a list of each email address which you've ever sent mail to.

Why would you want that? In my case my (personal) spam filtering makes use of whitelisting, and the assumption is that if I've ever mailed you in the past then I want to see your replies, and you get a break.

These days my (personal) mail filtering has a couple of broad rules:

  • If your mail is HTML it is junk. Unless I'm bored.
  • If your mail is GPG signed/encrypted I will see it.
  • If your mail address is on my whitelist then I want to see it.

After that then I see your message only if CRM119 decides I should.

# remove potentially spoofed header
:0 fhw
* ^X-whitelist:
| $FORMAIL -I "X-whitelist"

#  GPG-signed messages are OK and will be whitelisted
* < 1024000

| $FORMAIL -A "X-whitelist: yes" -A "X-GPG-Signed: Yes"

#  Get the sender of the message.
FROM=`formail -x From:| sed 's/^\([^@]*[ <]\)//' | sed 's/\([ >]\).*$//'`

# Add a whitelist tag if appropriate
:0 fhw
* !^X-whitelist: yes
* ? test -s $HOME/.procmail_whitelist
* ? echo $FROM| fgrep -qisf $HOME/.procmail_whitelist
| $FORMAIL -A "X-whitelist: yes" -A "X-Whitelist-Test: $FROM"

The net result of these tests is that I can now run the spam filter on non-whitelisted mails:

# Run CRM114 mailreaver
:0fw: .msgid.lock
* !^X-whitelist: yes
| /usr/bin/crm -u /home/steve/.crm /usr/share/crm114/mailreaver.crm

#  Spam.
* ^X-CRM114-Status: SPAM.*
* !^X-whitelist: yes

#  Unsure.
* ^X-CRM114-Status:.*UNSURE
* !^X-whitelist: yes

There is more to my setup than that, but that's the minimum you'd need to see.

Of course this is a reminder, once more, that the kind of filtering that you carry out for yourself is different from that that other people will do.

ObFilm: The NeverEnding Story