Gus Wirth wrote: > I recently discovered that Google mail accounts (gmail) allows a unique > form of e-mail address. It turns out you can use your e-mail name and > add a plus sign (+) and some other word to form a valid e-mail address. > For example, if I had an account at gmail with my user name of > not-my-real-address, I could do something like this:
That has been a part of sendmail for years. Postfix supports +. qmail (by default) uses -. I had noticed that about qmail a long time ago, but it was a halfsies kind of thing. I tested offsite to gmail, and gmail to gmail, and only one worked. I submitted a feature request / trouble call about it, and theyy fixed it: they removed the user+ext functionality altogether. If it is back, I would not rely upon it always working. What does work, and should always work, is that all .'s inside the user portion are ignored. u..ser, us.er, and u.s.e.r. are all the same, but you should be able to filter on them (untested). > I have done some tests and this works great. I can now create arbitrary > e-mail address for various accounts and know where it came from or who > leaked my e-mail address. Have you tested remote -> gmail and gmail -> gmail? Do they both work? Can you set the From: from within gmail, so the From is [EMAIL PROTECTED] when you reply? > The problem now arises where certain web sites reject the e-mail address > as being invalid because of the inclusion of the plus sign. In my > reading of RFC822, pretty much any character except for a few special > characters can be used in the address. A plus sign is not considered > special as near as I can tell. + is legal. > I'm I wrong, or are these web sites that do e-mail address validation > screwed up? Many webistes are screwed up. -john -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
