On Wednesday February 10 2010 10:45:37 Mike Cardwell wrote: > On 10/02/2010 00:31, Kai Schaetzl wrote: > >> MISSING_SUBJECT, > >> > >> Now, why the message that SA is creating is getting TWO Subject: lines > >> is a different question. > > > > because SA thinks it's got no subject, so it adds one as it is instructed > > to tag the subject. Obviously, it wants to see at least a whitespace > > after the colon to accept it as a header. > > I don't think so. At least, in my tests here, v3.3.0 doesn't. Both of > these commands lead to SpamAssassin outputting a single "Subject: > *****SPAM*****" header: > > echo -ne "Subject: \nX-Foo: bar\n\nviagra CIALIS\n"|spamassassin > echo -ne "Subject:\nX-Foo: bar\n\nviagra CIALIS\n"|spamassassin
Indeed, the bug was fixed with v3.3.0 (Bug 6016). Kai Schaetzl wrote: > I did some research on this matter some > time ago and if I remember correctly the latest RFCs (5322, maybe 2822) > indeed require a whitespace while older RFCs (822) were not 100% clear > about this. This is incorrect. A space is not required after a colon. Both the RFC 5322 and RFC 2822 are perfectly clear on this. Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: >> So Thunderbird displays the last Subject line header it comes across. >> Is that incorrect behaviour for an MUA? > > I think it is. Setting aside the question of whether they are supposed > to be there or not, the purpose of an MUA is to make it easier for > the user to interact with a mail message. Multiple Subject: lines > can contain multiple amounts of information, and only displaying the > last Subject line is denying the user information that they are > supposed to be able to see see. The RFC 5322 (and RFC 2822) require that a Subject header field appears zero or one time. Multiple Subject header fields are not allowed. A MUA can do whatever it pleases with syntactically invalid mail messages: garbage-in, garbage-out. Mark
