RE: Discourage broken content (was: Broken images in mails)
> I think we should discourage all broken content in email and on the web. But who is to decide what is "broken". Just because giftext/giffix/gocr/etc. fail to parse it, doesn't necessarily mean it's broken. The software may be buggy (note the patches on the download page needed to make these utilities work properly with legitimate images). Howard
RE: Discourage broken content (was: Broken images in mails)
> Yes, by definition, it DOES mean its broken. So when then giftext author made an error in assuming every image would have a global colormap, he redefined the GIF specification so that any that don't are no longer valid? Howard
RE: Discourage broken content
> Could somebody explain to me the reason why MailScanner acts this way? > A good question could be decide if you adapt this plugin to be compatible > with MailScanner or tha last one should change this practice. As a resource/denial of service protection mechanism. If someone starts feeding you 10MB messages and spamassassin has to run all of its regular expression checks, etc. on the full content of every message, your server would die. Or consider sites the have lots of messages with huge PowerPoint attachments. SPAM messages are rarely very big, so it's actually a nice feature - until you want to use plugins like FuzzyOCR that need full content. Howard
