From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/4822 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Per Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: (gnus-inews-domain-name); insertion of Sender: Date: Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:22:06 +0100 Message-ID: <199601191422.PAA01295@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> References: <199601181337.OAA28961@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> <199601190834.JAA01129@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> <199601191014.LAA01179@ssv4.dina.kvl.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035145516 30951 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:25:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:25:16 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miranova.com (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id HAA00971 for ; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 07:24:25 -0800 Original-Received: from elc1.dina.kvl.dk (elc1.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.228]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:23:34 +0100 Original-Received: from ssv4.dina.kvl.dk (ssv4.dina.kvl.dk [130.225.40.223]) by elc1.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) with ESMTP id PAA25188; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:19:21 +0100 Original-Received: (abraham@localhost) by ssv4.dina.kvl.dk (8.6.12/8.6.4) id PAA01295; Fri, 19 Jan 1996 15:22:06 +0100 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-reply-to: pp@pfawww.pp.se's message of 19 Jan 1996 14:29:02 +0100 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4822 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:4822 >>>>> "PP" == Per Persson writes: PP> So using a half-hearted/intelligent authentication method which might PP> return bogus values is better then letting the user make sure that the PP> value returned is correct? Thanks for clearing things out for me. A value provided by the user is per definition wrong for the Sender: field. The Sender: field is not expected to reflect the users mail address. That would have been really stupid, as we already have the From: field for that.