Re: Redundant QP encoding of Subject/From fields...

[ha...@t-online.de]

Hi,

since it says webmail, I would not be surprised to see a webmail application that does qp encoding all
the time. libertzsurf.net is a french operation, and iso-latin-1 os preferred encoding for french

Wolfgang Hamann

>> 
>> I got the following spam.  I've included the header:
>> 
>> Return-Path: <ji...@aliceadsl.fr>
>> Received: from mail.libertysurf.net (webmail-out.libertysurf.net [213.36.80.105])
>> 	by mail.redfish-solutions.com (8.13.8/8.13.7) with ESMTP id kAM1ckKs008704
>> 	for <ph...@redfish-solutions.com>; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 18:38:52 -0700
>> Received: from aliceadsl.fr (192.168.10.57) by mail.libertysurf.net (7.1.026)
>>         id 43F3DDC5003935BF; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:22:49 +0100
>> Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:22:49 +0100
>> Message-Id: <J9...@aliceadsl.fr>
>> Subject: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Representative_Needed.?=
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> X-Sensitivity: 3
>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_=__=_XaM3_.1164158569.2A.498089.42.6019.52.42.007.3770"
>> From: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?jiangsu=5Fchemicals@aliceadsl.fr?=" <ji...@aliceadsl.fr>
>> 
>> My question is this.  The encoding of the Subject: and From: lines
>> is redundant.  There are no non-USASCII characters in either field.
>> Hence, specifying =?iso-8859-1?Q? is not necessary.
>> 
>> The test SUBJECT_EXCESS_QP seems to handle this (at least the Subject:
>> part).  I'd like to crank it up to 3.5 or higher.
>> 
>> Any intuitive reasons why this wouldn't work?  Are there any
>> valid mailers that are braindead?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> -Philip
>> 
>> 
>>