> From: Jim Breton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 16:02:49 +0000
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 11:43:33AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Claus has been attaching a signature to his messages which looks like
> > an attachment to a borken mail reader, but not to any compliant mail
> > reader.
>
>
> Firstly, I should say that my mail client is not broken. :) But since
> this topic has come up, I took a few minutes to test a Web mail
> application I sometimes use and have found that it does indeed think that
> such a signature is a "binary attachment."
>
> Where can I learn about the specifics of this problem? You mention that
> this will not happen with a "compliant mail reader," are you referring
> to a MIME spec? Is there an RFC I can read which will give me a clue as
> to how best to track down and report the flaw in that Web app?
"Broken" might be overstating things. The clue is that there is *no* RFC that
says that a mail program should see that as an attachment. It's an example of
software authors creating risks by trying to do things automagically that
probably shouldn't be done.
How about instead of saying that your client is broken, we say it's doing
something stupid and unnecessary. I guess that's not the same thing.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues virCIO
http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/ http://www.virCIO.Com
+1 512 432 4046 +1 512 374 0500
4314 Avenue C
O- Austin, TX 78751-3709
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
