On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 17:39, Antony Stone
<antony.st...@spamassassin.open.source.it> wrote:
PS: I notice you choose to take the opposite approach with your own
Reply-To header, deliberately making it more difficult for people to
reply to the list :)
On 31.05.18 17:00, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
I just use the official ios client, where such regulations are not
possible.
what has Reply-To: in common with regulations?
This is an example of default client settings that may put you
in trouble, and the usefulness of server-side enforced policy.
I see different problem with proposed approach:
Removing or changing Reply-To (or other DKIM-signed header) requires
removing DKIM signature. That may require changing From: address (if DKIM
policy indicates sender signing all mail), which means that your mail is
taken, modified and re-sent, "signed" as someone else.
If we take your mail as your artwork, this could get us in trouble :-)
Servers
can automatically do things to keep both owners and clients on the safe
side of the law. We shall not make the mistake of ignoring the GDPR: many
sites are going down as we speak.
I agree that GDPR apparently needs some polishing (or lawyer recommendation)
but I don't like doing it this way
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
