On Dec 9, 18:15, Paul Williams wrote:
> Pete Turnbull wrote:
>
> [Quoting headers from one of Tony's emails]
>
> > Content-Type: text
> >
> > Moreover, they have no attachments, no hooks for attachments, and
> > nothing other than correct ASCII headers and plain ASCII text (as,
> > indeed, the headers indicate).
>
> This header is invalid according to RFC 2045, because it should
contain
> a type and subtype (in this case, it should be text/plain).
True, it should contain a subtype. On the other hand, the header is
only required if the mail uses MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail
Extensions). RFC2045 allows *extensions* -- but does not require them.
RFC822 is authoritative for plain-text messages, and that header
simply shouldn't be there at all. It shouldn't appear without the rest
of the MIME stuff, anyway. I guess ELM is based on an out-of-date
(not-quite-)standard (RFC1049), though even then that header is illegal
according to RFC1049.
Not, however, an excuse for some broken software to consider plain text
to be a virus.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Received on Tue Dec 09 2003 - 16:32:47 GMT