[Mailman-Users] non-subscribers getting through--email address in "Real Name"

Richard Damon Richard at Damon-Family.org
Fri Jul 27 20:28:36 EDT 2018

On 7/27/18 7:28 PM, Jordan Brown wrote:
> On 7/27/2018 4:18 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> Yes, there are existing formats that at least mostly represent this
>> in the message itself, but not for display. Especially that currently
>> the wrapping message would say it is from the list, but you really
>> want some way for it to say that in the MUA's message list, it should
>> indicate who the author of the embedded message was, not the 'author'
>> of the wrapping message. This probably means that we need a new
>> message content type to indicate it. 
> A message content type is one possibility, but other headers might
> also be reasonable.
>> Also, the MUA (or maybe their MTA) should know enough to pierce through
>> that wrapping message and give an indication that the wrapped message
>> passes or fails the appropriate tests. The current formatting doesn't
>> imply that that should happen.
> Shrug.  I wouldn't consider it to be silly for an MUA to apply those
> tests to any message/rfc822 part, whether or not it came from a
> mailing list.
> If I do a forward-as-attachment to forward a message to you, it would
> be good if you could independently verify that the forwarded message
> is from who it says it is from.
> Anyhow, it's clearly possible, probably with minimal standards for
> message metadata.  The problem (after getting agreement on the
> metadata) is getting an adequate number of MUAs to behave well with
> the wrapped messages.
Mark, maybe, but the option to reject, no, as the message might be an
older message that is being forwarded from an archive, and perhaps keys
or other settings have changed. Also, part of DMARC (SPF) can't be
tested for, as we don't have the original source the message was sent
from, so we can only make a DKIM test.

Richard Damon

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list