[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(fwd) "Will You Be a Terrorist?"
>I'd suggest that a much more productive avenue of approach would be to
>improve the aliasing facilities of a remailer provider to allow a
>pseudonym to look like a fully normal name.
I'm not sure that's a good solution.
Todd, Todd, Todd. You can run a remailer and the mailing list on the
_same_ machine and do the aliasing in the remailer. You can even
restrict operation of the remailer to work only with the mailing list,
if that's what you want.
The issue here is clean separation of abstraction.
>At his site [that's CMU--EH] there's this
>'name+extra' syntax which delivers mail to 'name', but because of a
>special sendmail version 8 macro in the Received: field both the
>'name' and the 'extra' can be recovered. The 'extra' is then an input
>into a remailer as a pseudonym.
Sure. I'm familiar with AMS [...]
This doesn't require AMS. I've done the same hack myself in ruleset 0
of sendmail. Then you tweak the HReceived line to add the $u macro,
which under sendmail v8 includes the whole address which caused
Another, better I think, possibility is
to add headers and let the MUA sort it out: you don't have to depend upon
non RFC-822 features in the MTA.
That's exactly how it works now. The Received field is rfc822
compliant, and the remailer, which is a part of the MUA, is where it