BugTraq
Re: base64 Sep 25 2003 01:06PM
MightyE (trash mightye org) (1 replies)
Re: base64 Sep 25 2003 03:30PM
Bennett Todd (bet rahul net) (3 replies)
Re: base64 Sep 25 2003 11:46PM
Earl Hood (earl earlhood com) (2 replies)
Re[2]: base64 Sep 26 2003 06:02PM
3APA3A (3APA3A SECURITY NNOV RU)
Re: base64 Sep 26 2003 05:08PM
Bennett Todd (bet rahul net)
RE: base64 Sep 25 2003 08:20PM
Alun Jones (alun texis com) (1 replies)
Re: base64 Sep 26 2003 06:11PM
Bennett Todd (bet rahul net)
2003-09-25T16:20:46 Alun Jones:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bennett Todd [mailto:bet (at) rahul (dot) net [email concealed]]
> > Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:30 AM
> >
> > Do all this canonicalization before the message hits your
> > attachment type policy enforcement and malware scanner, so they only
> > have to deal with the common forms that everybody handles the same.
>
> With the obvious disadvantage that we're all reduced to using the
> lowest-common-subset of functionality.

Absolutely.

> Never mind inventing or supporting new features, or adding
> international file naming support, in your new email client,
> because the mail server will strip all of that out, anyway. I
> don't think that's an appropriate answer.

It's certainly not the appropriate answer for all settings.

Outlaw people from receiving email on Windows, and we can do away
with all this sludge.

-Bennett

[ reply ]
Re: base64 Sep 25 2003 06:21PM
MightyE (trash mightye org)


 

Privacy Statement
Copyright 2010, SecurityFocus