----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Apthorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 2004 March, 24 08:11
Subject: Re: Outlook 2003 idiot mail client... :(
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 16:32:27 +0100 "Kai Schaetzl"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Anders Norrbring wrote on Wed, 24 Mar 2004 07:06:39 +0100:
> >
> > > Rest assured that I will, I actually paid some good money for my
Office pack
> > >
> >
> > Anders, you should complain loudly to Microsoft about this, you are a
> > customer. If only a few customers complain about the MID, but nobody
complains
> > about the missing MID then they won't re-add it.
>
> Seriously. It appears that Microsoft intentionally broke their mail
> client on the request of their (idiot) customers. This indicates that
> Microsoft listens to their customers, at least to their idiot customers.
> So you have to get Microsoft's attention somehow; you may have to
> pretend to be an idiot to get them to listen to you.
...
> Or maybe this is done purposely to degrade SpamAssassin accuracy to
> promote Microsoft's proprietary email Caller-ID scheme...
>
> /me adjusts tinfoil hat...
Bob, there is a simple enough trick to cover this, in theory. Teach
email clients on corporate networks to catch the fact that there is
no Message-ID field and that the email headers indicate it is from
Outlook 2003. In that case insert a Message-ID that looks like the
old Outlook Message-ID field. Of course, I bet the spammers do this
before the revised servers get out into the field for the rest of us.
So perhaps that Outlook rule needs to have an Outlook 2003 rule of
opposite polarity. Or else with all the discussion here, where there
are spammer scum listening, perhaps the Outlook rule has become
obsolete. I know if I were a spammer with software that mimicked or
tried to mimic Outlook I'd certainly be putting in the properly
formatted header now.
{^_^}
