Tickets :: Comment on [#13041] Posibillity to diabled the Received from ... (Horde Framework) with HTTP header line injection to the e-Mail header lines.

* Your Email Address
* Spam protection	Enter the letters below: __ .__ . .. ..__ / `[__)\|__\|\| \|[__) \__.[__)\| \|\|__\|[__)
Comment	>>> is there a possibility, or could this be realized, to diabled the >>> Received from ... (Horde Framework) with HTTP ... header line >>> injection to the e-Mail header lines. >> >> This is a terrible idea. It is explicitly prohibited against RFCs. > > Maybe the is a missunderstanding or my first desciption of my problem > was not so good. > > I don't want to disable ALL Recived: from lines, only the first line > which insert > the Horde Framework HTTP header line from the client/Desktop PC. > > In Roundcube or in LotusNotes you can configure this, to hide the > client/Desktop PC > Received: from line! > > I remember, that the Received: from line for the sender MTA must be > in the header lines, > but not from which client/Desktop PC the e-Mail was sent to the first MTA. > >>> This could be good for security reason, because sometime I use a >>> browser at a place, and I don't want to get lines like the following >>> in my e-Mail-Header: >> >> If you are worried about privacy, then don't send e-mail messages. > > If you worried to die while you cross the street, did you stop walking? > >> Otherwise, if you remove those headers, it becomes a security issue >> from the recipient's side, since they can no longer effectively >> track the message in the case of abuse. So these headers are for the >> benefit of the recipient, not the sender. You start removing >> tracking headers and you become at risk of being put on various RBLs, >> for example. > > No I think that the sender MTA must be reachable for abuse, note the > client/desktop PC! > > With postfix header_checks, I realized "header stripping" for that > line, but I think when > Roundcube and other client software/webmailer could do this, why not > Horde too? > > Thank you, hope we can discuss this, and sorry, when I didn't > explaind my problem very well > in my first post. > > Klaus.
Attachment
Watch this ticket

Saved Queries