Buggy feat_force_name?

Date: Mon 14 Apr 2003 - 19:53:59 GMT

The display of an html part (and its file name) is determined by the
content-disposition header (or header of part) field, ie:

Content-disposition: attachment; filename=blah.html
   to make it look like an attachment, or
Content-disposition: inline; filename=blah.html
   to display it inline

(the filename bit is optional)

I believe that by default Outlook displays html parts with no
content-disposition field as "inline". Check this header field in your emails as
if you are having a problem, this is probably where it lies. Maybe Anomy is
making content disposition "attachment" where not specified. Equally (or more
likely), Outlook is buggy in this respect.

Its all in RFC 2183, apparently.

Oliver Tickell.

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Santinoli" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 6:25 PM
Subject: [anomy-list]: Buggy feat_force_name?

Hi all,
  I'm having troubles with the feat_force_name configuration directive.
According to the documentation, when set to 1 it should "Force all parts
(except text/html parts) to have file names".
However, when Anomy processes "dual mode" (plain text + html) mail
generated by Outlook, the name "unnamed.html" is assigned to the
text/html MIME part, which makes it look like an attachment to
recipients using Outlook. Is it possible to avoid this?

What are the security implications of letting 'feat_force_name = 0'?

Relevant message samples and config data follow.

========================= original message =========================

hosted by