Bookworm wrote: > In an old message from 2006, Jason Haar wrote > Wow - you're replying to a message from 2006? Good memory ;-)
> By doing a bit more research, it turns out that this appears to be incorrect. > According to RFC 2045, section 5.2, it looks as though the ascii should be > assumed, even with no Content-Type or a broken Content-Type header. > Not quite. It says that if a message has a MIME-Version header and doesn't have a Content-Type: header, then it should be assumed the message is "Content-Type: text/plain". And that is what Qmail-Scanner does. So it appears (back in 2006) Qmail-Scanner was blocking that message for some other reason. If you look in the code, you'd see this block only triggers if an *existing* (i.e non-NULL) MIME Content-Type header *isn't* of the form "something/something" (eg text/plain, application/postscript, etc). The regex is a bit more complicated than that - but that's basically it. You really need to supply the actual affected message for anyone to say any more -- Cheers Jason Haar Information Security Manager, Trimble Navigation Ltd. Phone: +64 3 9635 377 Fax: +64 3 9635 417 PGP Fingerprint: 7A2E 0407 C9A6 CAF6 2B9F 8422 C063 5EBB FE1D 66D1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Qmail-scanner-general mailing list Qmail-scanner-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qmail-scanner-general
