From: Charles Lindsey (chl@clerew.man.ac.uk)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2004 - 05:59:59 CST
In <40284A8A.9030304@erols.com> Bruce Lilly <blilly@erols.com> writes:
>Charles Lindsey wrote:
>> In <BC496506.C777%planb@newsreaders.com> "J. B. Moreno" <planb@newsreaders.com> writes:
>> True, but malicious/stupid/incompetent posters and/or their agents WILL.
>> What is the injecting agent supposed to do then? Looks like there is
>> nothing much it can do :-( .
>Reject the article. If there is a suitable mechanism, it can inform the
>poster of the reason for rejection. The poster can stop being malicious,
>purchase a clue, take lessons, or complain to the supplier of his broken
>agent, as the case may be.
No, because there are a (very) few cases where double injection can occur
legitimately (usually where there has been some complex gatewaying), and
in these cases the Injection-Date will be already present (and MUST NOT now
be changed). But there is no way in general to distinguish these few cases
from that of the malicious/stupid/incompetent poster.
-- 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@clerew.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