Hello, I have system a which updates database records reading incoming email title. This system can read emails if they are in certain formated subject lines. Some time users do reply with changed subject line which may not be have ill format. Linking such email became challenge. I am thinking of adding a special email header which will have requried... more »
hello, why in the second message i can not see "for <em...@address.com>; " information ? it is not mandatory ? thanks of your answers Received: from mx4.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.203]) by compute1.internal (LMTPProxy); Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:11:18 -0400 Received: from spock.galacsys.net (mx2.galacsys.net [88.191.250.28])... more »
The following Outlook Express version numbers in the X-Mailer header line indicates that the e-mail is a spam - and can be discarded. 6.00.3790.4682 6.00.3790.2962 6.00.3790.1106 6.00.3790.181 6.00.2900.2963 6.00.2900.2969 6.00.2800.2962 6.00.2720.4682 6.00.2600.4682 6.00.2600.1409 3 new ones added today:... more »
Identifying spam based on X-Mailer: X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1106 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2963 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2969 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2962 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.1409
commander viagra en ligne on viagra a vendre citrate de sildenafil soft us usa viagra Generique Inde viagra suisse au rabais en ligne sans prescription citrate de sildenafil bon marche canada Achetez viagra canada viagra canada par email viagra canada commande en ligne commander viagra canada en ligne aucune prescription... more »
I just got a spam from 84.24.139.149. Interesting thing was the X-mailer: X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1106 A search of my e-mail inventory turns up no other hits for that version of OE. Google search for 6.00.3790.1106 turns up 7 hits, and groups search turns up 3. Is 6.00.3790.1106 a valid OE version?... more »
Hello group, I was wondering why many mail programs do the following: A user types an address of the form "user name"<myacco...@example.com> Now those programs change this user input to user name <myacco...@example.com> This seems incorrect to me. According to RFC2822, it would be correct to change the user input to... more »