mouss wrote:
Marcin Praczko wrote:
It is possible add some text to Subject: For example [SPLIST] - to make easier
set up filter for emails?
How about having the logo in png format on the subject line :)
List managers (and other software) should not alter email unless
absolutely necessary. This includes subject tagging, reply-to munging,
removal of trace headers, format conversion, ... etc. The people who
compose messages know better how their messages should look like. Local
policies may override this, because local users have a chance to hang
their sysadmin ;-p
If they're lucky they can. If they work for Uncle Sam, and their
sysadmin trots out "security requirements" as their lame excuse for
breaking things they don't understand, then they're screwed. As in:
Received: from gate3-sandiego.nmci.navy.mil (gate3-sandiego.nmci.navy.mil
[138.163.0.43])
by mail.redfish-solutions.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id
l8AGAjaQ028222
for <XYZZY>; Mon, 10 Sep 2007 10:10:50 -0600
Received: from nawesdnims03.nmci.navy.mil by gate3-sandiego.nmci.navy.mil
via smtpd (for mail.redfish-solutions.com [66.232.79.143]) with ESMTP;
Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:00:18 +0000
Received: (private information removed)
Received: (private information removed)
Received: (private information removed)
Received: (private information removed)
Received: (private information removed)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: Chuckle
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:10:39 -0700
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Chuckle
Thread-Index: AcfzukOHakkCi8HDRJ2nEhvQOY8RZgACopXw
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "John Doe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Philip Prindeville" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2007 16:10:40.0158 (UTC)
FILETIME=[219FDBE0:01C7F3C5]
Could they have just *deleted* the Received: lines they didn't want to show? "No,
of course not. That would be too easy. Let's mangle them into something that doesn't
conform to RFC-822 instead."
As it is, they were leaking hostnames through the "Reference:" and
"Message-Id:" fields anyway... but we won't talk about that.
They couldn't even leave the "id" and "timestamp" fields in the Received: lines
because that would be revealing... ummm... revealing... uhh... how many licks it takes to get to
the center of a tootsie pop... or some such nonsense.
