Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:14326 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 95447 invoked by uid 1010); 10 Jan 2005 15:29:42 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 95427 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2005 15:29:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Jan 2005 15:29:42 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.228.1.85 h2g2.staff.proxad.net Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from ([213.228.1.85:41740] helo=h2g2.staff.proxad.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity HEAD (r4059)) with SMTP id 01/66-31705-56F92E14 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:29:41 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by h2g2.staff.proxad.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EE73856 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:29:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from h2g2.staff.proxad.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (h2g2 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04789-08 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:29:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by h2g2.staff.proxad.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 33F32852; Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:29:33 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:29:33 +0100 To: internals@lists.php.net Message-ID: <20050110152933.GA4311@h2g2.staff.proxad.net> References: <20041228115825.GA25679@h2g2.staff.proxad.net> <65df911e0412280813503bc5cb@mail.gmail.com> <20050107095751.GA2238@h2g2.staff.proxad.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <066401c4f5c4$645bf600$0200a8c0@rusko> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at h2g2.staff.proxad.net Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Patch to PHP mail() function From: obeyssac@proxad.net (Olivier Beyssac) Paul G wrote: > while i can't speak for why noone has replied to your mail, please > search the list archives for the discussion of my equivalent patch > submission a few months back. in short, it was rejected and while i might > disagree with that (the arguments against were wrong and a derivative > patch is now being used in production on a lot of shared servers running > cpanel), there appears to be no chance of having something like this > get accepted. OK, I found your thread here: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=108592532700002&r=1&w=2 Well, I have the same needs as you: we have a lot of VHosts, a lot of untrusted users, a lot of untrusted PHP scripts and our abuse team wants to be able to identify any script that generated unsollicited emails. We have ways to control network sockets usage too. And as far as I know, all my friends who are working for other hosting companies have similar restrictions. My patch only adds header if php.ini directives tell him to do so and doesn't change any default behaviour or POLA. Only my 10 cents... I don't want to start any flame-war but I wanted to say that adding those headers is a really useful feature for us too. -- Olivier Beyssac - obeyssac@proxad.net