Need mail-client to show headers only, before download.

Since the telnet access to pop and smtp servers is so simple and
exactly as per rfc, I'm wondering why not all mail-clients show
the pop headers of mails still on the server, so that bad mails
can just be deleted instead of downloaded.

Since:
TOP
eg.
TOP 23 4
shows the header and the next 4 lines of mail number 23,
one can easily get a look into any mails which are suspect;
and even extract the initial text before any attatchments
start.

Because my existing mail-client [under Oberon OS]
doesn't do the required send-authentication now
required by my ISP; ie. 'LOGIN', what the gold-standard
Micro$loth-outsp00k uses, I used outsp00k.

It starts loading everything from the server !
Perhaps it could be setup differently ?
But what linux [not too bloated] client can do what I
want ?

Thanks for any info,

== Chris Glur.

Re: Need mail-client to show headers only, before download.

no-top-post wrote:
> Since the telnet access to pop and smtp servers is so simple and
> exactly as per rfc, I'm wondering why not all mail-clients show
> the pop headers of mails still on the server, so that bad mails
> can just be deleted instead of downloaded.
>
> Since:
> TOP
> eg.
> TOP 23 4
> shows the header and the next 4 lines of mail number 23,
> one can easily get a look into any mails which are suspect;
> and even extract the initial text before any attatchments
> start.

This is exactly what MailWasher [1] does.

> Because my existing mail-client [under Oberon OS]
> doesn't do the required send-authentication now
> required by my ISP; ie. 'LOGIN', what the gold-standard
> Micro$loth-outsp00k uses, I used outsp00k.
>
> It starts loading everything from the server !
> Perhaps it could be setup differently ?

If your Outlook setup uses POP (or IMAP), you can add MailWasher to do
what you want.

N.B. If you want help, then it's best to just name the product by its
real name, instead of silly and rather childish distortions.

> But what linux [not too bloated] client can do what I
> want ?

The Pro version of MailWasher is also available for Linux, but
MailWasher is an additional program, i.e. it does not replace your
normal mailer/MUA.

> Thanks for any info,
>
> == Chris Glur.

Please fix your "From:" line. It results in rather silly attributions
and requires people to have to keep/quote your signoff message.

Please also fix your "Newsgroups:" line and (superfluous)
"Followup-To:" line. The newsgroups should be only be seperated by a
comma, no spaces allowed.

[1]

Re: Need mail-client to show headers only, before download.

On 2006-10-29, no-top-post wrote:
> Since the telnet access to pop and smtp servers is so simple and
> exactly as per rfc, I'm wondering why not all mail-clients show
> the pop headers of mails still on the server, so that bad mails
> can just be deleted instead of downloaded.
>
> Since:
> TOP
> eg.
> TOP 23 4
> shows the header and the next 4 lines of mail number 23,
> one can easily get a look into any mails which are suspect;
> and even extract the initial text before any attatchments
> start.
>
> Because my existing mail-client [under Oberon OS]
> doesn't do the required send-authentication now
> required by my ISP; ie. 'LOGIN', what the gold-standard
> Micro$loth-outsp00k uses, I used outsp00k.
>
> It starts loading everything from the server !
> Perhaps it could be setup differently ?
> But what linux [not too bloated] client can do what I
> want ?

I use a shell script:

--
Chris F.A. Johnson, author |
Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any,
A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the
2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence

Re: Need mail-client to show headers only, before download.

Is POP3 a requirement?

IMAP clients (good ones, anyway) have had this capability for ages. The
client can get the message envelope (header) and MIME information (which
you won't get from POP3's TOP command) without actually having to fetch
the message.

One such client is Pine.

Although Outlook supports IMAP, I wouldn't think of using Outlook for
email. Outlook's IMAP engine is little more than a POP3 engine that
babbles IMAP protocol, and many of Outlook's email capabilities require
Exchange. What's more, most spam these days seems to be aimed at
exploiting Outlook vulnerabilities...(to which Pine is delightfully
immune).

Sadly, however, Outlook is becoming increasingly standardized as there is
still (Chandler, where are you???) no satisfactory open-source alternative
for Outlook's groupware facilities.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

Outlook"s groupware facilities. (was: Need mail-client to show headers only, before download.)

Mark Crispin wrote:
[deleted]

> Sadly, however, Outlook is becoming increasingly standardized as there is
> still (Chandler, where are you???) no satisfactory open-source alternative
> for Outlook's groupware facilities.

Is anybody (for significant values of "anybody") actually *using* said
"groupware facilities"?

In a previous life, our 100,000++ employee shop used Outlook (with
Exchange), but the "groupware facilities" were hardly used, if at all.
Only the group calendaring, and even that did not work across (Exchange)
servers, i.e. basically useless.

Things may have improved since then (2003), but at the time I was
largely unimpressed and so were my colleagues, etc..

Re: Outlook"s groupware facilities. (was: Need mail-client to showheaders only, before download.)

On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Is anybody (for significant values of "anybody") actually *using* said
> "groupware facilities"?

Sadly, yes. While none of us were paying attention, the Exchange virus
was quietly spreading.

Even those at the front lines of containing the Exchange virus are
predicting at least two orders of magnitude spread.

While it is premature to predict the death of open protocols such as SMTP,
POP3, IMAP, NNTP, etc., the risk is there. None of the existing open
protocols solutions for mobile devices are satisfactory. As for
calendaring and contact management, the less said the better.

Until recently, I never thought that Exchange would be a serious threat to
open protocols. We all underestimated the impact of Blackberry, which is
the killer app. Outlook is just along for the ride.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.