1996-02-02 - Re: FV Demonstrates Fatal Flaw in Software Encryption of Credit

Header Data

From: “Paul M. Cardon” <pmarc@fnbc.com>
To: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
Message Hash: f8cdb2041485ddbb4f5cc0f807aa4cccaaf7679d495cbc512d9b858778800653
Message ID: <199602022142.PAA10232@abraxas.fnbc.com>
Reply To: <9601292111.AA23738@toad.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-02 23:40:21 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 07:40:21 +0800

Raw message

From: "Paul M. Cardon" <pmarc@fnbc.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 07:40:21 +0800
To: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
Subject: Re: FV Demonstrates Fatal Flaw in Software Encryption of Credit
In-Reply-To: <9601292111.AA23738@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199602022142.PAA10232@abraxas.fnbc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

My mailer insists that Nathaniel Borenstein wrote:
> I know people are tired of hearing from me, but I can't let *this*
> go unchallenged:
> Excerpts from mail.cypherpunks: 30-Jan-96 Re: FV Demonstrates Fatal
> F.. "Paul M. Cardon"@fnbc.co (580*)
> > Interesting address that was used to reach me.
> > To: pmarc@nsb.fv.com To: pmarc
> > Somehow, both reached me from within their system, but if they
> > can't configure their e-mail to show the proper address than I
> > don't have to much faith in their other abilities. I don't
> > imagine that anybody else would have much luck replying to either
> > of those or CAN I now receive mail at nsb.fv.com? Is this a new
> > free service provided by FV?
> Bogus mail addresses of that kind are typically added by all sorts
> of mail relays. In other words, although I can't tell you 100% for
> certain without seeing the mail headers, the scenario underlying
> this was probably something involving a bogus mail relay.
> Alternately, there are some systems where this could have all
> happened entirely on your end, in your delivery software. There are
> a zillion ways this can happen, actually. I've checked my archive,
> and that address definitely was not in the mail when it left my
> system.

You like that zillion word when you can't quantify something.

> I can guarantee you that it wasn't our system that did this. If
> there's one things we know cold, it's email.

C'mon Nathan.  It was in the Received headers generated at your  
end.  I agree that it COULD have happened on our end, but it didn't.  
 I've never seen anybody with such an arrogant attitude.  BTW, it  
looks like it has been fixed now.  :-b

Paul M. Cardon

MD5 (/dev/null) = d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e