At 19:33 2003-09-25 +0200, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
I am against letting those headers out, for the same reason that
I am against mentioning a virusscanner in some disclaiming text
somewhere in the body of a message.
Yea, adding virusscanning data to _sent_ messages is pretty stupid, since
it's trivial for a virus to do the same thing, or for a virus to USE such a
message as it's plain text portion. Not to mention that just because the
SENDER'S A/V software didn't spot a virus doesn't mean there wasn't one, or
that a subsequent host (such as a mail relay) couldn't have mangled the
message.
Anyone can put those lines in the headers, so it's best to remove
them from incoming mail. Users might get accustomed to them and
start 'trusting' them.
That, uh, would be a foolish thing for a user to do. If someone USES
SpamAssassin, they can easily blast those headers from the message before
subjecting the message to their local invocation of SA. IMO, someone would
have to be a complete moronto be running SA and not be doing this to begin
with.
They should at least use a more unique header, like
X-RWTH-Aachen.DE-Spam-Status,
to point out that it's just a local conception.
If you've got a beef with it, perhaps you should just strip the headers out
before you process your copy? If your site uses SA and doesn't strip the
previous headers, then perhaps you should have a chat with the sysadm and
ask that they consider doing the right thing and removing such headers.
It isn't as if the end of the header doesn't already identify a (partial,
not FQDN) hostname for the host which inserted the header.
---
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail