Re: Discussion - non-free software removal
Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 03:17:22PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 11:17:01PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > > It appears that Craig forged the To: headers as well as the From:
> > > > header on his obnoxious auto-responder. Sigh.
> > >
> > > No, i did not. look at the headers, they're not that hard to decipher.
> > > the entire mesage, as sent by you, was sent back to YOU (and no-one
> > > else) with the go-away message prepended.
> >
> > The message in question had a "From:" header which had *my* name, and
> > a "To:" header which did not accurately describe the destination of
> > the message. That's a forgery.
>
> you obviously don't understand how bouncing (in the MUA sense of the
> word, rather than the MTA sense) a message works.
Quite the contrary, I do.
An MUA is supposed to generate a *new* message, and then deliver the
message to the stated recipients.
An MTA has two usual options; one is to generate a new message, the
other is to forward an existing message, but in the latter case, it
isn't supposed to modify the
> equally obviously, you don't understand the distinction between message
> headers (which are *comments*, not addressing information) and message
> envelope (which *IS* addressing info).
I understand the distinction. In a non-forged message, the To: header
accurately represents the recipients. It's not the *same* as the
recipients, as a reflection on mailing list processing will make clear.
> the following is NOT forgery. it is returning your unwanted mail to
> you, exactly as it was received.
"exactly as it was received" means without modification. You are
modifying the messages.
> this is no more a forgery than a mailing list resending your message.
> it operates on exactly the same principle and is triggered by your
> action.
Except that a mailing list doesn't modify the message in transit.
Reply to: