Re: Sender header

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Jan 04 2002 - 11:57:52 CST


In <Pine.LNX.4.10.10201031551001.31072-100000@spock.peak.org> John Stanley <stanley@peak.org> writes:

>Charles Lindsey (chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk):

>>Well I put that wording in of Dec 20th (and Seth, at least was happy with
>>it).

>And I am not.

>> That is how it will remain unless someone speaks up.

>Be very very careful using the "silence is approval" argument in this
>group. Were this true, I could use your silence regarding the proposed
>prohibition against injectors playing with From and Sender headers as
>agreement with me, when the truth is the archive just stopped working for
>two weeks, and is still having problems. Or do you agree with me and have
>you inserted the prohibitions where they belong?

I have said I will remove the wording allowing injectors to replace a
Sender header (though not that to insert one when there was none).

But I have not inserted any further prohibitions, because I hear no
consensus to do so.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.uk      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29.