<html>
<body>
I'm trying to get the encapsulation going at the moment, but Eudora seems
to do some very strange things with the message I produce. But from what
I read of RFC1521 I am doing it right.<br><br>
If the rfc822 encapsulation doesn't work well (it should in theory,
but...) then I could look at the MIME structure.<br>
If it is a multipart/alternative, then attach the HTML and text parts as
attachments.<br>
If it isn't an alternative, then add the HTML and text parts to the list
of attachments.<br><br>
I can just fix the names of the attachments to something like
"OriginalMessage.html" and "OriginalMessage.txt". Any
other type of original body data would, I guess, just end up being
"OriginalMessage.dat".<br>
But I don't yet know what would happen to HTML messages that included
images shipped with the message. Hopefully references to them would still
work from the OriginalMessage.html attachment.<br><br>
At 14:57 16/05/2003, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I believe the way to do this is to
embed the whole message, headers and all, as content-type message/rfc822.
The easy way to verify this is to forward an existing email as an
attachment in Mozilla, or most other email programs, and then look at the
message source.<br><br>
Tim<br><br>
On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 08:57, Stephen Swaney wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font color="#737373"><i>I'll find
out what thet do and get back to you.<br><br>
<br>
On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 08:50, Julian Field wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>The bit I'm not sure about here is
what to do with multipart-alternative messages (where you have HTML and
plain-text versions). These already have more than 1 part, so I'm not
sure what to put in the "attachment" that contains the original
message.<br><br>
If I delete the plain-text version, all the pine/mutt users in the world
will hate me. But if I delete the HTML version, all the Outlook users in
the world will hate me.<br><br>
Any ideas what the system this firm has created actually does with the
message?<br>
Do we have the ability to be able to pipe messages through it to find
out? Or do you know who created it, as I might be able to extract the
answer from their tech support :-)<br><br>
At 13:11 16/05/2003, you wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I agree with not messing with the
message, but one firm has created a system where when a message is
detected as spam, the original spam is encapsulated as a attachment to a
message that reads:<br><br>
-----------------------------<br><br>
Our mailscanner believes that the attachment to this message sent to you
by <br>
<br>
</font><a href="mailto:spammer@junkmail.com"><u>spammer@junkmail.com</a></u><br>
<font color="#737373"><br>
Subject:<br>
<br>
Work from Home, Make big Bucks!!!<br><br>
is Unsolicited Commerial Email (Spam). Unless you are sure that this
message is incorrectly thoght to be Spam, please delete this message
without opening it. Onpening Spam messages might allow the Spammer to
verify your email address.<br><br>
If you believe that this message has been uncorrectly marked a spam,
please forward this email to
</font><a href="mailto:whitlist@company.com"><u>whitelist@our-company.com</a></u><br>
<font color="#737373"><br>
------------------------------<br><br>
When this technique is combined with good {Spam?} and {High Spam?}
scoring, it might allow the identification of false positives while
hiding offensive images and messages.<br><br>
Note that email to
</font><a href="mailto:whitelist@our-com"><u>whitelist@ourcompany.com</a></u><font color="#737373">
is not automatically whitelisted but examined to see if it should be.
<br><br>
Thoughts?<br><br>
<br>
On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 06:01, Julian Field wrote: <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><br>
</i></font><pre>At 10:19
16/05/2003, you wrote:
>Brilliant !!! Thanks Julian.
>
>I am 100% happy with your solution. But if I may push
my
luck... How
>difficult would it be to transfer this header line into an
attachment
to
>the message named something like
"spam_score_details.txt",
and get the
>list of test & scores in a neat format with carriage returns
after each
>score, and an explanation at the top for the user saying something
like
>"Your MailScanner system has performed the following tests to
determine if
>it was spam. Please see yout local IT officer for more
details".
Or leave
>us to create that piece of text so that we can add our contact
details, etc.?
Not keen on that. MailScanner doesn't mess with the message more than
it
has to, and this would create an attachment on every single message.
Even
if you just do this with spam, you are adding to your spam load
problem,
not reducing it.
--
Julian
Field</pre><u><a href="http://www.MailScanner.info">www.MailScanner.info</a></u><br>
<font color="#737373">MailScanner thanks<br>
transtec Computers for their<br>
support</font></blockquote><font color="#737373"><br><br>
<br>
</font><pre>--
Stephen Swaney
<</pre><a href="mailto:Steve@swaney.com"><u>Steve@swaney.com</a></u><font color="#737373">><br><br>
Linux Systems Solutions, Inc.<br><br>
</font></blockquote><br>
-- <br>
Julian Field<br>
<u><a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/">www.MailScanner.info</a></u><br>
<font color="#737373">MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their
support</font> </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote></body>
<br>
<div>-- </div>
<div>Julian Field</div>
<div><a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/" EUDORA=AUTOURL>www.MailScanner.info</a></div>
<div>Professional Support Services at
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.biz/" EUDORA=AUTOURL>www.MailScanner.biz</a></div>
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support
</html>