1993-02-02 - Re: Remailer abuse?

Header Data

From: Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.FI>
To: Brad Huntting <huntting@glarp.com>
Message Hash: 4a771d907eb9a10fa87848947876851f3a1d3f7c0096f2311cc15ffa94a7cff5
Message ID: <9302020824.aa17567@penet.penet.FI>
Reply To: <199302020039.AA00440@misc.glarp.com>
UTC Datetime: 1993-02-02 07:19:13 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 1 Feb 93 23:19:13 PST

Raw message

From: Johan Helsingius <julf@penet.FI>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 93 23:19:13 PST
To: Brad Huntting <huntting@glarp.com>
Subject: Re: Remailer abuse?
In-Reply-To: <199302020039.AA00440@misc.glarp.com>
Message-ID: <9302020824.aa17567@penet.penet.FI>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

> > You could also use another standard 822 field, Sender, as follows:
> > 	Sender: anonymous remailing service <remailer@host>
> Unfortunatly, some broken mail user agents reply to "Sender" instead
> of "From" or "Reply-To" (which also violates the standard).

Right. I am using this method on anon.penet.fi, and get *lots* of
incorrectly addressed stuff sent to the administrator because of this.
The worst culprits seem to be the BITNET LISTSERV (oh no, not again!),
VMS Mail-32 or DECMail or whatever, and elm/pine...

There was actually a case of a interaction of VMS mail and CC:mail that
caused the final recipient to *only* get the "Sender:" field, not the
"From:" field...