[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Malformed header - what would you do?

2005-07-19 16:30:08

On Fri July 15 2005 20:00, Frank Ellermann wrote:

Paul Smith wrote:

Is the software adding the 'X-SPAM-STATUS' line wrong

Not really, 2822 says about CFWS:

| However, where CFWS occurs in this standard, it MUST NOT
| be inserted in such a way that any line of a folded header
| field is made up entirely of WSP characters and nothing
| else.

That's only about 2822-header fields, and not about the
obscure X-SPAM-STATUS.

2822 covers the Internet Message Format, and specifically
notes that extension/user-defined (unlike 822, 2822 does not
officially distinguish the two distinct types) fields must
conform to the unstructured field restrictions on syntax, and
that would include the restriction on whitespace-only header

So, returning to the original question:
Is the software adding the 'X-SPAM-STATUS' line wrong

Does the software claim conformance with RFC 2822?  If so, yes.