Closed Bug 1381373 Opened 8 years ago Closed 8 years ago

Insufficient filter configuration options

Categories

(Thunderbird :: Filters, defect)

Product:
Thunderbird
Component:
Filters
Version:
52 Branch
Type:
defect
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED INVALID

People

(Reporter: mozilla, Unassigned)

Details

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/52.0 Build ID: 20170627155318 Steps to reproduce: Note: I followed the link to "Enhancement requsts" and got into the bug system. This is not a direct bug, but an urgent enhancement request. --- After a upgrade from an outdated MS Outlook Express 6.x (old XP), i have created a handfull of message filters in TB to achieve the same filtering. Actual results: Lots of spam and ads are not filtered. Expected results: Investigating the TB message filtering option, I am totally surprised to experience that it is apparantly *not* possible to filter-out an entire domain aka the mail part after the @. The TB option currently, are only the "IS" option that only operates on the entire mail-address. This option has been available in MS Outlook for ages ! Please dont tell me, that if a user want to discard all messages from a domain like @hotels.com, You need to add every single mail construct, incl. every time a new from the same occurs. This is kinda spammer paradise! Somewhere i am hooked up on a "rayban" seller, that apparantly change hes email-name every week, so that I have to follow up and add this moron to the filter, just because a missing basic functionality in TB. Please add a filter rule to TB, like "from" and add "domain". If not, I feel forced to find another mail-client, of wish I as a Mozilla fan would be hard against my nature.
You can gimme the code, and I will change/add that filter. Its just a few new lines in a simple case select.
In my Thunderbird I can change the operator from Is, to Contains, Doesn't contain, Is, Isn't, Is empty, Is before, Is after, Is higher than, Is lower than, Begins with, Ends with, Sounds like, LdapDwim (Do What I Mean), Is greater than, Is less than, NameCompletion, Is in my address book, Isn't in my address book, Isn't empty, Matches, Doesn't match. All edepending on the field you are filtering on, of course. So if you want to discard all mail messages from @hotels.com, just filter on ‘From’ ‘ends with’ "@hotels.com"…
Component: Untriaged → Filters
Now - You make a "from" filter on my domain "@e-mogensen.dk" and give me Your direct mail. The I will send You a test mail. The tell if it was blocked. Note - You must set the condition "Move to trash, so that you can see it" OK ?
Clearly there are sufficient filter configuration options and this is a support request. Please note: Bugzilla is NOT a support forum. It is a tracking system for bugs in Mozilla products. This is a support question. You can get support here: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/products/thunderbird
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → INVALID
Summary: filter → Insufficient filter configuration options
well - If a filter option does not do as supposed, then its a bug. I have tested this before I file a report and this is out my conviction about there is a flaw. Note that I asked Onne Ekker to verify this, because on my system it does *not* work. Please be happy when voluenteers try to report someting they spot. Allso note - that some bug reports may come out of lack of documentation, In this case if the so-called option only operate on a domain when it is written preceeding with a @ (here with the option "ends with"). If this is the case, where are the documentation then. People cannot got to forums for every undocumented feature.
(In reply to mozilla from comment #5) > If a filter option does not do as supposed, then its a bug. What exactly isn't working? Yes, a "From" with "@e-mogensen.dk" won't work, you need to use "contains" or "ends with". Does that not work?
No - I just got an email through, despite a filter. "from", "ends with" on target "nelly.com" does not work (without the @ in front, which is not stated anywhere as a must). I have taken a screen dump as proof which You can see at URL: e-mogensen.dk/filter_error.jpg Note: The filter is created on local folder.
Hmm, I've tested a filter with "ends with" "jorgk.com" and the filter works, even if the message comes from "XYZ <xyz@jorgk.com>". I'm not sure what you try to achieve with "Delete From POP Server". That would delete the message from the POP server, but not the downloaded copy. That would make sense if you left some messages on the POP server, as can be configured in the account settings. So your proof really proves nothing. Or are you saying the the message is not deleted on the POP server? I've configured an account to leave messages on the server and the rules deletes them. So I really can't see anything that doesn't work.
Ok - things are lightenend up. I have tested a cases myself. "Delete from POP server" apparantly fetch the mail anyway (and obvious delete it from server) which is a clear bug. "Delete from POP server" means: "I dont want to recieve that mail at all - server can delete it". This functionality have been standard for ages on Outlook Express and makes perfect sense in above context. And why on earth should I recive a mail, that I clearly dont want to recieve. That makes no sense. The "normal" mail fetch allso delete the mails from the POP server (at least I have configured that). So the "Delete from POP..." option should *never* retrieve anything. I guess this functionality is from the early days, where bandwidth was a issue. Anyway - as things are now, and we have tested, You apparantly can create a filter with the intention of "rejecting from server" an unwanted mail, but which by all means are downloaded anyway. This is ridicuolus. So Yes - there are a "bug", "Delete from POP..." must be changed to *no* fetch.
Please read the Bugzilla etiquette (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/page.cgi?id=etiquette.html). Calling things "ridiculous" and demanding that things "must be changed" won't get us anywhere. You don't seem to understand the POP protocol and how filters work. POP retrieves messages from the server and once retrieved, they can be classified by a filter. To do what you need, configure the filter to delete the message (and delete it from the POP server if you want).
We are hopefully not old ladies that get upset when someone say something out of context. "ridiculous" means "laughing of..." and in this context the apparant and contradicting lack of logic with the POP delete. Leave space for some humor. I have worked as a pro. programmer since the start 80' and have seen a thing or two. I like to get critics myself in that essence, it is the only way I can improve myself. The POP protocol includes, that You can tell server to delete the message. The POP commends works/looks like an old telnet/FTP terminal communication with commands like LIST, RETR ... and DEL for DELETE a message (on the server). I have programmed with this protocol occasinally since the 90, so yes - I dont seem to understand the POP protocol (But im not an old lady - yet ;) haha - but maybe we all get transsexual with all that hormone like stuff in our food. Anyway - Im sad to see the that there is no real understanding about this strange behaviour (allso in the user forum). As things are now - You cannot totally reject mail from the server, and even if You could make a trick by adding an extra line which delete the downloaded mail, It violates the meaning with the "Delete from POP" which clearly refers to the POP command DEL(ETE) (on the mailserver). I guess this is an old mistake from the early thunderbird days, that no one has been aware of. This is my argumentation for correcting the behaviour and please ragard this as contrib. to improve the thing. Anyway - I cannot say more. Many thanks for Your kind responses Jorg - but please take this into serious considerations. Sincerely /Peter
For one, the summary of this bug does not cover what you want to achieve: there are plenty of filter configuration options. So now it is about the filter actions, instead of the filter options. I don't know how the Thunderbird filters do work exactly, but it's reasonable to think that they first fetch the message and then check to see if the filters may apply. Maybe if you configure Thunderbird to only fetch message headers in the account's server settings, it works as you expect? You might also want to check your other server settings, like when you delete a message (immediately, after a couple of days or when you delete the message locally).
(In reply to mozilla from comment #11) > As things are now - You cannot totally reject mail from the server, and even > if You could make a trick by adding an extra line which delete the > downloaded mail, It violates the meaning with the "Delete from POP" which > clearly refers to the POP command DEL(ETE) (on the mailserver). I guess this > is an old mistake from the early thunderbird days, that no one has been > aware of. The simple fact is that a sophisticated filter/rule engine *must* download the message to filter it, for example for body searches. Yes, you could enhance that engine to do simple things without downloading the entire message, for example "From" could be checked by downloading headers only first. Peter, please file an enhancement request: Implement filter action "Delete from POP without download" (or similar) for header checks. Let me give you some background. The filter module in TB is practically unowned, twisted and highly regression-prone. In other words, no one touches it. TB is almost purely volunteer-based, so you'd have to find a willing volunteer, hire a person or do it yourself if you want a new feature. The TB project currently has three staff to guarantee its bare survival: A person who looks after releases and makes sure Daily builds work, a build engineer and an infra/web engineer. There is absolutely no one with the skill set or time to implement what you're asking for.
@Jorg ! It's should be quite simple from my perspective (without sounding arrogant).I have programmed up against a POP protocol several times. Yes - You gotta look at some mailheader info. I guess that TB get all the "stuff" from the server and from there sort out/filter from the user criterias. This assumption is based on my obervations and ofc. Your last comment. And you seems to agree about the "forgotten" purpose of the POP delete. Soo - the "module" just have to look at the headers - You allready got it ! Nice - then lets do it ! Anyway - I can offer, if "someone" gave me access to the so-called filter "module" for analyzing, so that I possibly could file the suggested changes in code aka clearly show what to change (or add), so that is only left for "someone" to verify and accept the mods. I understand from Your comment, that it is a quite a "hot" potato to mod. a basic module. but this is what i have done for years...and if You dont try - You will never know ! Maybe its easy - maybe its something You must ask CIA for permission to do. Ok JorgK - I guess You would like to end this. I have understood Your message about suggest an enhancement. /Peter
(In reply to mozilla from comment #14) > Anyway - I can offer, if "someone" gave me access to the so-called filter > "module" for analyzing, so that I possibly could file the suggested changes > in code aka clearly show what to change (or add), so that is only left for > "someone" to verify and accept the mods. All Mozilla code is open source, so you can get to work right now: https://dxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/source/ I think filters are here: https://dxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/source/mailnews/base/search/src and protocols are here: https://dxr.mozilla.org/comm-central/source/mailnews/local/src Welcome to the circle of volunteers, to do a simple Thunderbird build, read here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/Build_Instructions/Simple_Thunderbird_build Further resources: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird Maybe read: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/Contributing_patches No guarantee that this stuff is up-to-date, I mentioned the lack of resources. I'm pretty sure the "Simple Thunderbird build" page is lacking the information that you need to install Mozilla's language Rust to compile.
It's better than I thought, that page directs you to https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/Build_Instructions/Windows_Prerequisites (or similar pages for other platforms) and that mentions Rust.
Thanks - Code Looks nice and structured. Hope the core is easy to locate. Gotta run code through brain. Get Cola & Pizzas !! Hope its just a matter of streaming a solution into existing - time will show. Otherwise R.I.P.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.