libgmime

[Matthias Andree]

Scott Lenser <slenser at cs.cmu.edu> writes:

>> > uuencode
>> 
>> we don't need that. test will not be uuencoded because it would be
>> unreadable for netscape then.
>> 
>
> I don't understand why we don't need this but I can't find a single
> spam that is uuencoded so I'll assume you are right.

uuencode is not an encoding format specified by the MIME standards, nor
do all mailers have support for it. Spammers won't use formats that
restrict the readability their message unless they get popup chains,
flashing text, colors and big images in turn.

> Point taken.  I know next to nothing about the RFCs so I just forwarded
> along the information I had.

That's fine. I don't say gmime does not implement the first RFCS of that
list, I just say I don't trust that information.

> Obviously, it is a problem if we can't redirect these messages.  I don't think
> this will be too hard to do.  How about this, I'll look into it and find out
> whether it is a problem or not.

If you can save the time, that'd be excellent. Other than that, I'd be
looking into writing our own decoder library.

> I use the address parsing to split the To and Cc lines into separate
> addresses and to split the names from the email addresses.  This lets
> me easily make tokens like "TO:E:slenser at cs.cmu.edu" and "TO:N:Scott
> Lenser" which are indicative of ham for me.

No more once this message pops up in web archives of the mailing
list...

> I've also found that people with email addresses that are close to
> mine alphabetically that I don't know that also get spam become great
> spam features.

True.

-- 
Matthias Andree