> That makes it invalid input to any module that requires input to comply with > RFC5322, pure and simple.
Well, OK, with the stipulation that no existing MUA I have ever seen is such a module. > I think if it becomes well-known that users of MUA 1 are easier to phish than users of MUA 2, a lot of people will gravitate to the safer implementation, don't you? I sure would. Aw, come on. How many millions of people still use Outlook Express on Windows XP? Switching MUAs is painful, people rarely do it. R's, John _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
