I think the answer here is no, but I’m looking to create a Smart Mailbox
based off whether a message has this header field:
X-Mailer: Ghost Mailer

I’m getting a truly inordinate amount of Spanish-language spam, all from
different addresses, and I’m trying to work out how to filter. It’s often
more than a hundred a day - ISP spam filter catches some, Mail catches a few
more...and then there are the tens per day that actually get through.

I -think- they all have this flag, but I’m trying to prove it before I go
stomping on legitimate mail. Hence question.

Cheers,
Ian

On 27 Jun 2023, Ian McCall wrote
(in article<0001HW.2A4AEE9100576BEB30DC3438F@news.individual.net>):

> I think the answer here is no, but I’m looking to create a Smart Mailbox
> based off whether a message has this header field:
> X-Mailer: Ghost Mailer
>
> I’m getting a truly inordinate amount of Spanish-language spam, all from
> different addresses, and I’m trying to work out how to filter. It’s often
> more than a hundred a day - ISP spam filter catches some, Mail catches a few
> more...and then there are the tens per day that actually get through.
>
> I -think- they all have this flag, but I’m trying to prove it before I go
> stomping on legitimate mail. Hence question.

Using Apple Mail, I can’t set up a Smart Mailbox to handle non-standard
headers. No problem with a standard Mailbox where you can add any additional
headers to the check list.

--
Cheers, Alan

On 27 Jun 2023, Alan B wrote
(in article<u7ej3a$1ct4v$1@alanrichardbarker.eternal-september.org>):

> On 27 Jun 2023, Ian McCall wrote
> (in article<0001HW.2A4AEE9100576BEB30DC3438F@news.individual.net>):
>
> > I think the answer here is no, but I’m looking to create a Smart Mailbox
> > based off whether a message has this header field:
> > X-Mailer: Ghost Mailer
> >
> > I’m getting a truly inordinate amount of Spanish-language spam, all from
> > different addresses, and I’m trying to work out how to filter. It’s
> > often
> > more than a hundred a day - ISP spam filter catches some, Mail catches a few
> > more...and then there are the tens per day that actually get through.
> >
> > I -think- they all have this flag, but I’m trying to prove it before I go
> > stomping on legitimate mail. Hence question.
>
> Using Apple Mail, I can’t set up a Smart Mailbox to handle non-standard
> headers. No problem with a standard Mailbox where you can add any additional
> headers to the check list.

I’m talking about setting up a new rule of course! It seems odd that non
standard headers can’t be added when the destination is a smart mailbox.
It’s probably down to my misunderstanding!

--
Cheers, Alan

On 27 Jun 2023, Alan B wrote
(in article<u7ejfk$1cuh9$1@alanrichardbarker.eternal-september.org>):

> I’m talking about setting up a new rule of course! It seems odd that non
> standard headers can’t be added when the destination is a smart mailbox.
> It’s probably down to my misunderstanding!

Yep - exactly. I can find something that moves them to a real mailbox via the
Rules options. But not one that can categories them via the Smart Mailbox
bit.

Am a bit frustrated with Smart Mailbox to be honest - not syncing across
devices and having what looks like a potentially completely separate rules
engine to the main Rules bit is...well...odd.

Cheers,
Ian

Am 27.06.23 um 19:51 schrieb Ian McCall:
> On 27 Jun 2023, Alan B wrote
> (in article<u7ejfk$1cuh9$1@alanrichardbarker.eternal-september.org>):
>
>> I’m talking about setting up a new rule of course! It seems odd that non
>> standard headers can’t be added when the destination is a smart mailbox.
>> It’s probably down to my misunderstanding!
>
> Yep - exactly. I can find something that moves them to a real mailbox via the
> Rules options. But not one that can categories them via the Smart Mailbox
> bit.
>
> Am a bit frustrated with Smart Mailbox to be honest - not syncing across
> devices and having what looks like a potentially completely separate rules
> engine to the main Rules bit is...well...odd.

One of many reasons why I use Thunderbird. Apple Mail is an awful piece
of software.

--
Prudentia potentia est

On 27/06/2023 18:51, Ian McCall wrote:
> On 27 Jun 2023, Alan B wrote
> (in article<u7ejfk$1cuh9$1@alanrichardbarker.eternal-september.org>):
>
>> I’m talking about setting up a new rule of course! It seems odd that non
>> standard headers can’t be added when the destination is a smart mailbox.
>> It’s probably down to my misunderstanding!
>
> Yep - exactly. I can find something that moves them to a real mailbox via the
> Rules options. But not one that can categories them via the Smart Mailbox
> bit.
>
> Am a bit frustrated with Smart Mailbox to be honest - not syncing across
> devices and having what looks like a potentially completely separate rules
> engine to the main Rules bit is...well...odd.

I presume the reason you can't have a rule move a message to a smart
mailbox is because a smart mailbox is virtual - there's nowhere to move
messages to.

Instead you'll need to set a property on the spam that a smart mailbox
can then look for. The only one that seems likely is to set the message
colour and then have a smart mailbox show you all messages with that colour.

But it does beg the question: if you can move the spam to a physical
mailbox why not do that and delete the contents of that mailbox regularly?

Either way, you'll still need to delete them unless you make that the
rule's action.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

On 28 Jun 2023, Bruce Horrocks wrote
(in article<d92f54ce-225c-1bfd-184c-12562be8338c@scorecrow.com>):

> But it does beg the question: if you can move the spam to a physical
> mailbox why not do that and delete the contents of that mailbox regularly?

Because at the moment I don’t know what that property might be - it
doesn’t seem consistent. I want to set up a Smart Mailbox so I can test the
hypothesis before going into full nuke ‘em all mode.

Cheers,
Ian