[Mailman-Users] from_is_list Wrap Message: what does that look like?
mark at msapiro.net
Wed Jan 11 18:19:17 EST 2017
On 01/11/2017 02:42 PM, Matt Morgan wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> wrote:
>> The big negative of Munge From is the message's From: header no longer
>> contains the address of the author of the message so the message is no
>> longer strictly compliant with RFCs 822, 2822 and 5322.
> Isn't it also an issue that the message doesn't say who it's from,
> potentially, or how to contact the sender?
That should not be the case. The original From: is always put in
Reply-To: or in some cases Cc: with the intent that a compliant MUAs
'reply' and 'reply all' function will address the reply the same whether
or not the message is Munged. Also, the sender's display name in the
original From: is preserved. In a simple case with no Reply-To: munging,
From: Joe Poster <joe at example.com>
will be sent from the list with
From: Joe Poster via AList <alist at example.net>
Reply-To: Joe Poster <joe at example.com>
> Or, I would guess on any list, someone will often say "contact me for more
> info" with the assumption that their email address is up above. Am I
> misunderstanding Munge From?
Yes. I think so. This is what the code says
> # MAS: We need to do some things with the original From: if we've munged
> # it for DMARC mitigation. We have goals for this process which are
> # not completely compatible, so we do the best we can. Our goals are:
> # 1) as long as the list is not anonymous, the original From: address
> # should be obviously exposed, i.e. not just in a header that MUAs
> # don't display.
> # 2) the original From: address should not be in a comment or display
> # name in the new From: because it is claimed that multiple domains
> # in any fields in From: are indicative of spamminess. This means
> # it should be in Reply-To: or Cc:.
> # 3) the behavior of an MUA doing a 'reply' or 'reply all' should be
> # consistent regardless of whether or not the From: is munged.
> # Goal 3) implies sometimes the original From: should be in Reply-To:
> # and sometimes in Cc:, and even so, this goal won't be achieved in
> # all cases with all MUAs. In cases of conflict, the above ordering of
> # goals is priority order.
We think all Mailman versions 2.1.19 and later do a good job of meeting
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
More information about the Mailman-Users