Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of oss-security-return-30113-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@lists.openwall.com designates 193.110.157.125 as permitted sender) client-ip=193.110.157.125;
Mailing-List: contact oss-security-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oss-security@lists.openwall.com
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 21:53:19 +0200
From: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
To: oss-security@lists.openwall.com
Message-ID: <20240502195319.GA19209@openwall.com>
References: <20231221143630.GD14101@suse.de> <ZjBHOEHylGAaIo57@moon> <20240430224823.uA8Nr1Cp@steffen%sdaoden.eu> <20240502182146.ygWZjB-Z@steffen%sdaoden.eu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240502182146.ygWZjB-Z@steffen%sdaoden.eu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i
Subject: Re: [oss-security] New SMTP smuggling attack

Steffen,

On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 08:21:46PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Please let me elaborate a little more on this, not to be
> misunderstood and also..

This reads like an excuse to post lots of thoughts that are off-topic
for this thread.  I understand that sometimes discussions wander off the
original topic, but in this case the second half of your message is
totally irrelevant.  I approved this one message anyway out of respect
for the time you spent writing it, but please be aware that I am
unlikely to do that next time you do something like this.  I also ask
others to please refrain from following up on parts irrelevant to this
thread's original topic.  Another reason I post this reply publicly is
not to give the impression that it's OK to hijack threads here.

Alexander