Backhair ruleset and current Microsoft e-mail

[Matthew Newton <mc...@leicester.ac.uk>]

Hi,

Just had to remove the backhair ruleset from use here because it is
triggering on real e-mail from Outlook. It seems possibly that Outlook
is creating XML mail with some strange tags in certain places, and this
is triggering the backhair rules because they are not correct HTML tags.

Is the backhair ruleset still recommended, or does this current type of
e-mail make its use obsolete?

Thanks!

Matthew


-- 
Matthew Newton <mc...@le.ac.uk>

UNIX and e-mail Systems Administrator, Network Support Section,
Computer Centre, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom

Re: Backhair ruleset and current Microsoft e-mail

[Chris Thielen <cm...@someone.dhs.org>]

Matthew Newton wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Just had to remove the backhair ruleset from use here because it is
>triggering on real e-mail from Outlook. It seems possibly that Outlook
>is creating XML mail with some strange tags in certain places, and this
>is triggering the backhair rules because they are not correct HTML tags.
>
>Is the backhair ruleset still recommended, or does this current type of
>e-mail make its use obsolete?
>
>Thanks!
>
>Matthew
>
>
>  
>
I still use backhair myself, although I'm not certain it's still 
"supported".  The original author is still lurking around somewhere ;) .

If there is an example email that isn't too private, could you send it 
as an attachment to me?  I'd like to see how it's FPing and possibly see 
about updating backhair.

Chris Thielen

Re: Backhair ruleset and current Microsoft e-mail

[Loren Wilton <lw...@earthlink.net>]

> Just had to remove the backhair ruleset from use here because it is
> triggering on real e-mail from Outlook. It seems possibly that Outlook
> is creating XML mail with some strange tags in certain places, and this
> is triggering the backhair rules because they are not correct HTML tags.
>
> Is the backhair ruleset still recommended, or does this current type of
> e-mail make its use obsolete?

I think you are the first person I've seen report something like this.

Up until now we've still been recommending backhair I believe (at least for
English-speaking jurisdictions).  However, it sounds like that either needs
to be re-evaluated, or perhaps backhair may need some updates.  It has been
a stable file with no changes now for a very long time because it just sits
there and works.  Maybe it needs some changes now...

        Loren