On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 17:30:24 PM -0700, NoOp ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> M. Fioretti wrote:
> > 
> > In any case, it has NOTHING to do with OpenOffice, _reading_ email or
> > replies.

What I meant here is that if Jan is really pissed off that his IP
address is merrily distributed around the Internet, he should complain
with his ISP first, because **they** are the ones adding that data in
such a redundant and non standard form that it passes through normal
header munging. What I have shown is that everybody who ever receives
an email message from that address of his will know his IP address
much more easily than it would be possible otherwise. See "NOTE"
below.

> > I have checked one of my messages in the same archive, and I
> > see no equivalent information:
> > http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=users&msgNo=117127&raw=true
> 
> Really? Try:
> http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=58090&raw=true

That is the message I wrote yesterday, so I could not have made *this*
test when I wrote it. Yesterday I just entered my address in the
archive and looked at the first message returned, which does NOT have
IP addresses. Maybe the newest version of the software keep more data.

NOTE: The interesting thing is that:

- both the archive RAW DISPLAY of Jan's message AND the copy every
  list member receive CONTAIN his IP address in the X-Originating-IP
  NON STANDARD format

- the archive RAW DISPLAY of the message I wrote yesterday contains my
  IP address in the STANDARD "Received:" headers, those which MUST be
  generated and exchanged as part of the SMTP protocol. Not in some
  custom format.

- those same "Received:" headers are MISSING from the copy of my
  message which I received through the list management software and my
  ISP receiving servers! Are they in your local copy?

Translation: most list management software recognize the standard
headers and are written to NOT redistribute that information to end
users. Ditto for receiving SMTP servers. But all these programs can't
run after every ISP that adds its own things, ie cannot know in
advance which X-* header must pass and which not. Therefore, Jan's
root problem is that he is currently using an ISP which "embraced and
extended" the email standards in a way that makes more difficult for
3rd parties (list managers, SMTP servers) to protect his privacy.
Hence what I wrote yesterday.

Back to your message now:

> The OP has a point, why publish full headers w/IP's on the archives?

Please quote properly. The way you quoted me and this last sentence of
yours make it look like I approve this practice, while I explicitly
said yesterday:

>Of course, I too agree that information like that should not be
>published on the Internet.

Of course, ISPs must keep track of communications on behalf of their
police, the police can find Jan's IP address in a million other ways
with or without his email (especially as long as he makes their job
easier using that ISP), etc.... but this is beside the point, it
surely doesn't justify publishing those data, as I already said
yesterday.

        Ciao,
                Marco

-- 
Marco Fioretti                    mfioretti, at the server mclink.it
Fedora Core 5 for low memory      http://www.rule-project.org/

Don't tell me how hard you work.  Tell me how much you get done.
                                                James J. Ling

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to