aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
31 hoursplan: implementation plan for init and parseDanilo M.2-2/+2404
Thirteen tasks, TDD throughout, stdlib only. parse is pure and offline: the trusted-relay boundary arrives as an argument rather than a config read, so the whole extractor is testable against fixtures with no setup. The plan carries three checks that are not ordinary unit tests. The Received-chain task has a mutation step, because walking one hop too far reports an innocent third party named in a header the attacker wrote, and a test that cannot fail would not protect against it. The URL task runs the suite with sockets refused, so the never-fetch rule is verified rather than read. And every fixture is asserted to leave no recipient address anywhere in the manifest. init exists because parse refuses to guess the trust boundary. It asks for CIDRs, offers a static table of known provider ranges, or reads the chain of a known-good sample and lets the user pick their own hops. A pure builder with the prompts and the flags as two front ends over it, so --non-interactive covers agent-driven setup and the config writing is tested without a terminal. Re-running shows what is already configured and asks; either route backs the old file up first and preserves sections this run does not set, so a later init cannot silently drop a MISP key. The prompts themselves are hand-tested rather than driven from stdin: a test there would assert the wording it was written against and break on a rewording that improved it. Task 12 is the checklist, weighted towards wrong answers. Redirect chains were missing from the first draft of the plan and are now specified: a parameter whose value is itself a URL is recovered as an indicator while every other value stays redacted, which resolves the conflict between reporting the destination and never publishing a tracking token. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KphFXTc2QajxXsHWyvGJ4R
31 hoursspec: retry deferred destinations from cron, not by handDanilo M.1-12/+123
A rate limit tells us when, not merely that: a 429 carries Retry-After or the vendor's reset headers. Recording the deadline and asking the user to run submit again throws that away and relies on them remembering. So `abusectl retry` scans every case for destinations whose retry_after has passed and sends only those, as one unattended cron line beside mailsync.sh. No inline retry: submit never sleeps waiting for a window, because a daily quota resets in hours and a process killed while sleeping is back to the user remembering. One mechanism, not two. Unattended retry makes three properties load-bearing, since a retry that re-sends is a duplicate abuse report and cannot be withdrawn. Status is written before the attempt, so a crash mid-send leaves in-flight, which is honest, rather than looking like it never happened; retry never touches in-flight. Attempts are capped, so a dead abuse mailbox stops being retried. A soft failure with no server deadline gets exponential backoff. deferred and failed are separate statuses: deferred means the tool will handle it, failed means the user must. Collapsing them either strands a rate-limited report forever or retries a dead mailbox indefinitely. The qtmaildir dialog accordingly grows no retry button. A deferred destination belongs to cron, and a button beside it would race the scheduled run. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KphFXTc2QajxXsHWyvGJ4R
31 hoursInitial commit: umbrella design for abusectlDanilo M.4-0/+839
An abuse reporting sidecar for phishing mail: parse a flagged message, extract its indicators, resolve abuse contacts, and file the result to a MISP instance and to public abuse channels. This is the umbrella spec, agreed in one design session. Each part gets its own spec before it is built; this settles what the parts share and what would be expensive to change later: the case directory and its manifest format, the redaction rule, the ordering between MISP and the vendors, and how partial failure is recorded. It exists as a separate tool because qtmaildir does no network protocol work by design, and this needs RDAP, three vendor APIs and mail to abuse desks. qtmaildir invokes it by name the way it invokes mailsync.sh, and hosts the review dialog; the two are coupled only by the manifest format and a command name in config. Two properties are recorded as safety properties rather than preferences. Recipient identifiers are never captured, at extraction rather than at submission, so the tool cannot disclose an identifier it was never given; tracking tokens inside URLs are covered, since a parameter value is frequently the recipient's address. And nothing remote is fetched while parsing, because following a link confirms the address is live and fires the tracker. parse is the first part to build: stdlib only, no network, no config, and its output is the format every other part reads. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01KphFXTc2QajxXsHWyvGJ4R