http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3350
------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-09-01 12:33 -------
A few things.
1) If standard MUAs deal with "plain/text", we should figure out something.
2) The RFC (1521) specifically states:
When a mail reader encounters mail with an unknown Content-type
value, it should generally treat it as equivalent to
"application/octet-stream", as described later in this document.
[...]
Appendix A
[...]
5. Upon encountering any unrecognized Content- Type, an
implementation must treat it as if it had a Content-Type of
"application/octet-stream" with no parameter sub-arguments. How
such data are handled is up to an implementation, but likely
options for handling such unrecognized data include offering the
user to write it into a file (decoded from its mail transport
format) or offering the user to name a program to which the
decoded data should be passed as input. Unrecognized predefined
types, which in a MIME-conformant mailer might still include
audio, image, or video, should also be treated in this way.
A user agent that meets the above conditions is said to be MIME-
conformant.
3) I've searched the hundreds of thousands of messages in my corpus area. 0
ham hits, 2 spam hits,
which upon review are actually Norton bounce messages from joe-jobbed worm
mails.
I don't think this is an issue for us. Either the Norton folks should change
to using text/plain, or by
RFC we are supposed to treat their MIME part as a binary.
I vote for closing WFM.
BTW: if you want to catch these messages, you can write a simple plugin for 3.0
which looks for parts
that have a "plain/text" content-type, it would be about 1 line of actual code.
:)
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
