Mail parser -> Rules and regular expressions for headers

[AllanMar]

Esupport v2 has mail parser rules based on email headers. This was great, however I was looking for regex support so when v3 came out with regex support, i quickly jumped on it.

However, to my surprise..email parser rules based on headers were not there. I didnt expect the new version to loose functionality that the old one had.

I've created a feature request as i was requested after submitting a ticket.

Its been almost a month and a half now, and nothing. I would settle for unencrypted files so i could do this myself. I dont think its fair however that i would have to upgrade to owned, just to add back a feature that should be there anyway.

With my current mail setup, the headers are the only way, and in other cases the best way to block all the **** email. My tickets are filled with spam and other emails I used to block with this feature.

Please add it back already,
-Allan

[v0lc4n0]

Yes, I realized the same thing. In v3 is no more option to make email parse rule based on content (or existence) selected email header. So I had to modify eSupport. I've added an option to check selected header (in my case it is X-Spam-Level for some contents.

For another header, just replace x-spam-level (XSPAMLEVEL, XSpamLevel) everywhere with your custom header name.

Attached is a my patch for 3.00.32 version.

[Kestutis]

I realise it's an old post, but still... IMO, header rules would be really useful, whether for spam sorting purposes, or other situations. Strange to see they were removed. Is there any reason for that?

For example, we got our mail server, and are using aliases for some emails (like suport@domain.com -> support@domain.com, help@domain.com -> support@domain.com). Kayako eSupport fetches messages by POP3 from the support box, but then it completely disregards where it got the messages from and just checks the "To:" headers. That destroys the whole deal since I need to create rules for every alias so the messages are delivered to correct department rather than to catch-all rule or just nowhere at all.

I have tried to modify the patch above, for Delivered-To: headers, then tried it unmodified - still doesn't work.

Does anybody use the patch or something similar to it, for their own purposes? Any comments, or even a working example of changing/editing the parser rules would make me a very happy person

Best regards,
Kestutis

[johnncx]

I just went to try and do some parsing based on the headers and saw that headers were missing from the insert parse rules. I would have thought that would be the most common thing people parse on! Shall have a look at said patch above and see about implementing it.

john

[jaroflcay]

Does this patch work with the current version?