Hi Derek, On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 07:03:48PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 11:07:30PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > > While I don't have proof that no clients have major breakage with these > > header fields, I can say that the most important ones don't have major > > breakage. > > Who are you to decide what the most important clients are? If my > favorite mail client is impacted, then that's the most important > client of all... TO ME.
The most prevalent, I should've said. Sorry for the imprecise wording. > > mutt(1) has been protecting many header fields for several years already > > (not by default, but you could enable it), and nobody has ever reported > > a bug, did any? The night sky is still up there and didn't fall on our > > heads. > > Virtually no one uses this feature, That you didn't know of this feature doesn't mean "virtually nobody uses it". Did you do any survey? I used it since the very first month I started using mutt(1). thunderbird(1) also protects the Subject using this mechanism. And most people with whom I exchange signed/encrypted mail do use this feature (maybe because I co-maintain the shadow project, and we are a niche group that have to handle mail discussing security vulnerabilities under embargo, and we don't want to disclose the slightest clue of such a bug; but we do use those features). Yeah, most people don't even use PGP, but going from that to virtually no one is a big stretch. Have a lovely night! Alex -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
