I think it's crappy of MS to think that this would in any way help keep
the identity of the end users secret.  But the bigger question is do we
block all users who use OL2003 because of this.  Fortunately my OL2003
is going through Exchange in order to send my email.

What I see as a problem is the number of small businesses that would be
affected by this change by MS.  I have done a few installs of Office
2003 for a company and will be doing a few more.  It seems that we will
soon (within the next year or so) be seeing a higher number of fp's if
we continue to assume that this is an MS problem.

They seem to have side stepped the rule to help one problem but have
caused another.  The flip side is that the application is still
complaint with the RFC.  It would have been nice for them to give us an
option to choose form though.

I know that my own customers who I provide SA services for would
probably have a problem is there counterpart business started having all
their spam labeled as suspect just because they choose to upgrade their
Office version.

Just my $0.02

Gary Wayne Smith



-----Original Message-----
From: Anders Norrbring [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 3:16 PM
To: 'Bob George'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: SV: Outlook 2003 idiot mail client... :(

> Anders Norrbring wrote:
> 
> > [...]
> > So, it's a "feature" in my Outlook 2003 to *not* include the
Message-Id
> > header.. Jesus!
> 
> But only if NOT using Exchange, right? :)
> 
> > So, how can we go about to make the MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT detection
skip
> > clients which adds the mailer tag:
> > "X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510", or at least
Build
> 11?
> > Outlook 2003 do add that, so can the detection engine be told to
check
> that
> > and not tag up the e-mails as spam because of the erroneous
"Message-Id"
> > tag?
> 
> Well, it's OUTLOOK that's broken, but... a meta rule could easily be
> created to check for both. Something like (untested):
> 
> header CLIENT_OUTLOOK2003 X-Mailer =~ /Microsoft Office Outlook, Build
11/
> meta OUTLOOK2003ADJUST (MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT && CLIENT_OUTLOOK2003)
> score OUTLOOK2003ADUST -3
> 
> So there's a fix for outlook, and a nice way for spammers to
circumvent
> the check. :) Maybe tighten the rules down more to be prudent.
> 
> It might be easier to just tweak the score for MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT
> down, since blindly trusting the X-Mailer header isn't a great
strategy
> unless you've got some other factor you can add to the meta to prevent
> simple forging.
> 
> - Bob


Here it is again, posted before...  All the headers from a mail sent out
via
my Outlook..  If there's something in the headers that can be treated as
"unique" or "safe", please let me know.

I'm afraid Bill G. doesn't invite med to his breakfasts, so my
complaints
about the lacking header element probably won't be noticed.. :)

------------
Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mail.the-server.net ([unix socket])
        by iris (Cyrus v2.1.15) with LMTP; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:35:17
+0100
X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by mail.the-server.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F02E10B7
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:35:17 +0100
(CET)
Received: from mail.the-server.net ([127.0.0.1])  by localhost (iris
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP  id 00478-04-9 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;  Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:35:07 +0100 (CET)
Received: from edit (edit.the-server.net [192.168.111.30])
        by mail.the-server.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47FAE1099
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:35:02 +0100
(CET)
From: "Anders Norrbring" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: 
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:35:07 +0100
Organization: Norrbring Consulting
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
thread-index: AcQQwoKtCVChFjvBQJmJ8aPi1IcuzQ==
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Virus-Scanned: by Amavisd-New, Kaspersky Lab's AV & NOD32 AV at
the-server.net
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=4.1 tagged_above=3.0 required=7.0 tests=BIZ_TLD,
MSGID_FROM_MTA_SHORT
X-Spam-Level: ****





Later,
Anders.


Reply via email to