
glenn-qmail at delink
Oct 10, 2003, 6:38 AM
Post #7 of 27
(21469 views)
Permalink
|
On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 06:15:10PM +0530, Payal Rathod wrote: > On Fri, Oct 10, 2003 at 01:17:41AM -0400, Russell Nelson wrote: > > No. Disclaimers are stupid and worthless. Since you're not forming a > > contract with the recipient, you can't bind them to anything. All you > > Right. In my company I said staight no to disclaimers incuring the warth > of many people. And I don't regret it, instead I manually set up a > disclaimer on each client MUA. This is marginally better because it isn't rewriting email after it is sent by the MUA, but it still doesn't address the absurdity of the notice. > BTW, won't disclaimers at MTA level break PGP messages also? > Also, is adding a "header" also not recommended at MTA level? It would depend on how you add the PGP signature and how you add the disclaimer. If multipart/signed messages are used, and the disclaimer is added without being MIME-aware, this could obviously be a problem. If inline signatures are used, the disclaimer would be after the signature. I am fairly sure that most implementations of signature verification would drop the data after the signature, but I would have to try it out and make sure. Adding a new MIME section if the signature and data is in another section as an inline signature shouldn't cause a problem though. -- Brian T Glenn delink.net Internet Services
|