full-disclosure - Re: Administrivia

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: trik-news at gmx.de (Spiro Trikaliotis)
Subject: Re: Administrivia

Hello,

I'm sorry since I think this is really OT on this list, but I only want
to tell that little bit of information in the hope to stop this
discussion.

* On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 11:07:27PM -0600 Frank Knobbe wrote:

> There is no absolute answer to this problem, like in much of security.
> It's a decision where each and everyone of us has to apply something
> special.... common sense.

Isn't that the reason why there is a Mail-Followup-To (MFT) header
(http://cr.yp.to/proto/replyto.html)? With this, the sender of a mail
can decide if he wants a copy of the mail or not.

If I want to get a copy of the mail in addition to the list, the header
is set to the list and my address, if I don't want this, I set it to the
list only.

Mutt, my MUA, supports the notion of lists and subscribed list. On a
non-subscribed list, I get a copy of any reply by setting MFT to myself,
too, while I don't get a copy on subscribed lists.

Why don't you all just let the user choose which way he wants to go?

Thank you,
   Spiro.

PS: Please honour my MFT.