-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Theo Van Dinter writes: > I've found that some spammers are sending out mails (in this case > multipart/alternative) with blank boundaries, in violation of the RFC. > aka: Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="" > > The RFC states that the boundary must be at least 1 char long. > > So the question comes up -- should we accept the blank boundary and > parse as normal, or should we see it as invalid and treat the entire > mime part as 'text/plain'? > > Of course, MUAs are no help here... > > Apple Mail happily takes the empty boundary and shows the > text/html part > Outlook Express shows the whole message as a single > text/plain part > mutt shows the whole message as a single text/plain > part > pine happily takes the empty boundary and shows the > text/plain part > > Part of me says we should follow the RFC, and part of me says we can see > what was meant so go ahead and do it (and let rules hit appropriately). > > Thoughts? my vote: emulate OE, it's what the spammers generally aim for. - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFAIqAIQTcbUG5Y7woRAlccAJ9P2XEhElHXE0i+xT6xXqBnFrYmfgCguErn adSB2uljOHhQ4mQtJiJaIp4= =fNmJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
