full-disclosure - a question about e-mails

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]

Message-ID: <20040228194812.GE26863@pomo.hostsharing.net>
From: nion at gmx.net (Nico Golde)
Subject: a question about e-mails

Hello Gary,

* Gary E. Miller <gem@...lim.com> [2004-02-28 20:19]:
> > > Sounds like a broken MTA to me.
> >
> > why?
> > regards nico
> 
> RFC 2822 Appendix B.1:
> 
>    1. Each recipient address from a TO, CC, or BCC header field SHOULD
>       be copied to a RCPT command (generating multiple message copies if
>       that is required for queuing or delivery).  This includes any
>       addresses listed in a RFC 822 "group".  Any BCC fields SHOULD then
>       be removed from the headers.  Once this process is completed, the
>       remaining headers SHOULD be checked to verify that at least one
>       To:, Cc:, or Bcc: header remains.  If none do, then a bcc: header
>       with no additional information SHOULD be inserted as specified in
>       [32].

ok, then the problem depends on the configuration of the mta and i will
fix it in my configuration.
sorry.
regards nico