Re: [SPAM] Re: Procmail question

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gregory Carter wrote:
> Actually, the forwarding of Bcc's do need header information, 
> specifically, who the message is to.  In this case it is the recipient 
> of the Email.

No, forwarding does not *require* the use of email headers.

If you want to take different action based on the email address that the
email was sent to, you should be using the envelope recipient address
(which is not an email header, but a separate piece of data associated
with the email; often passed to the LDA (Local Delivery Agent) via an
environment variable). This will always work (except perhaps in the case
where envelope recipient is different to the to/cc/bcc address)

This has absolutely nothing to do with forwarding, though; any action on
an email (e.g. filing to different folders) that requires knowledge of
the recipient address is affected by this.

> It is also not correct to say To, Cc, Bcc are handled in the exact same 
> way.   The header information for example is stripped in Bcc's.

Again, there is no header to *strip*, because there was no header
containing this information in the first place. It would be correct to
say that the sending MUA (Mail User Agent; sending email program) never
added a header, which is the whole point of BCC.

> Particularly with respect to procmail as:
> 
> * ^TO_user
> {
>      :0 c
>      ! [email protected]
> }
> 
> will work, but
> 
> :0
> * ^(Cc|To).*user
> {
>      :0 c
>      ! [email protected]
> }

True. That's because the above procmail code isn't implemented properly.
It should be using the envelope recipient not the email headers (or
possibly, using some combination of both the envelope recipient and
email headers if you want).

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFF00Bshk3bo0lNTrURApMtAJwNbjm0I0lt8HPHJ/VrudySinpIXgCfdFCk
styKjp4mPkQsfC3D5Z0x+YA=
=ND/y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----