I doubt it's as trivial as forging headers (but could be wrong), and on the other extreme I doubt the people sending would have a chance at figuring out how to sign emails. It's probably just not worth it for them to train people to sign emails.
> * Hyrum Wright [Tue, 27 Jan 2004 at 09:25 -0700] > > What does this say about who can send messages to the current-students > > list? One would think that on list like that, there would be some sort > > of authentication, either via a signed email or some other means. If > > anybody can send a message to the a campus list, simply by spoofing the > > from and reply-to headers, it opens up a whole new word for worms and > > spammer and the like. Definitely *not* a Good Thing. > > Yes, definately Not Good. This should be jumped on immediately (anyone > involved in university communications?) and requiring a signed email for that > list is a /very/ good idea. I would feel much more comfortable if my > 'university communications' were signed. Especially if I ever checked > my mail from a kiosk. But as it happens, I only ever check my mail with mutt > on a linux computer, even if it's remote using putty :) -- .O. Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. ..O http://hans.fugal.net | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg OOO | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach --------------------------------------------------------------------- GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
