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: <405B1216.25654.BE9A8AF@localhost>
From: nick at virus-l.demon.co.uk (Nick FitzGerald)
Subject: Administrivia (was: RE: Re: Microsoft  Security,
 baby steps ? )

madsaxon <madsaxon@...ecway.com> wrote?

> >Also, when sending messages to multiple lists (say F-D and Bugtraq), it
> >seems you may slightly reduce the multiple message spew that often
> >results on F-D because of the above by putting all the addresses in the
> >To: header, rather than one in the To: and the other(s) in CC:.
> 
> Why is that, do you think?

Because, from a rather cursory look at several such multiple mails, 
_some_ of those braindead "I'll forward it to every address I can find 
in the message headers even though it did not originate on-site" re-
posters only seem to do this with messages that have CC: headers.


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald


Powered by blists - more mailing lists