full-disclosure - offtopic: text/plain vs multipart/alternative (Re: Internet Exploiter meets FireFox)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon Sep 26 14:52:48 2005
From: 3APA3A at SECURITY.NNOV.RU (3APA3A)
Subject: offtopic: text/plain vs multipart/alternative (Re: 
	Internet Exploiter meets FireFox)

Dear Berend-Jan Wever,

It's  very common practice to send messages to public lists in plaintext
format. It reduces traffic significantly because in your case message is
3  times  larger  than  it  should  and  also  simplifies automated mail
processing.

Bugtraq denies messages in HTML format and I feel it's correct.

Please  correct  settings  of your gmail account (if possible) to do not
use HTML.

P.S. I'm not sure David is bugtraq moderator now.

-- 
~/ZARAZA
http://www.security.nnov.ru/

--Thursday, September 22, 2005, 7:25:17 AM, you wrote to full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk:

BJW> ? PS. Does anybody ever talk to Dave Ahmad? All my posts from gmail
BJW> seem    to   bounce   of   securityfocus   for   this   reason:   ?
BJW> <bugtraq@...ts2.securityfocus.com>: ? ezmlm-reject: fatal: Sorry, I
BJW> don't  accept messages of MIME Content-Type 'multipart/alternative'
BJW> (#5.2.3)  I'm  wondering  if  it's  just  me or everybody that uses
BJW> gmail?