🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <19950401.141115.83@musicbox.demon.co.uk> Richard Birkett (richard@musicbox.demon.co.uk) wrote:

> I fully support an *extra* header line added as a security measure, and
> perhaps X-Nntp-Posting-Host or something similar should be added even to
> IHAVE articles for this reason (the RFCs weren't written with much
> security in mind, so could safely be "interpreted" here, as they seem
> to have been elsewhere anyway!).  However, I do object to existing lines
> being changed, or indeed anything else that may affect the functionality
> or meaning of the message (eg. adding a Sender: line may mess up mailing
> list bounces; also, insisting on a spurious Organization: line is
> *contrary* to RFC1036 which states that this header is optional).

They don't add 'Sender:' to mail though, so that logic is spurious. I
suspect they are technically correct to add it, as they are the sender
as defined in the RFC. This is certainly true for mail2news, although
for NNTP POST it is less clear. They are strictly speaking the agent
inserting the article into the news system though, even in this case.

The thing with the 'Organization:' header is almost certainly a bug I 
think, and should be sorted, although it isn't exactly top priority.

> (I'm back to using NNTP POST, as it's far quicker - so my date is
> probably back to GMT now... It was Sat, 01 Apr 1995 14:11:15 +0100 when I
> sent it, and on previous evidence could now be anything between 13:11 and
> 15:11 GMT!).

It's 13:11 GMT which is at least correct.

> ObAcorn: !TTFN putting in a "Distribution: world" line is just as bad. 
> At least the user has a chance to delete or change that before sending.


This was discussed at length when TTFN first appeared (and various
versions did different things). The consensus was I think to do what
it does now. It certainly didn't bother me, but then I had been used
to Unix readers that always added a 'Distribution:' header anyway.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom@compton.demon.co.uk)
5 Lampits, Hoddesdon, Herts EN11 8EH
... Answers: $1, Short: $5, Correct: $25, dumb looks are still free.