Comment by tmarice 1 month ago Do elaborate. 7 comments tmarice Reply chrisjj 1 month ago "WARNING: Fastmail Masked Email insecurity" https://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=81287 tmarice 1 month ago One concrete vulnerability is mentioned in a linked thread and described here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37791500I have created a ticket with the Fastmail support asking them more details about the vulnerability you mention in your thread, I’m curious to see their response. chrisjj 1 month ago There FM said:> When forwarding an email as an attachment and later checking the headers of the attached email, I could not find the X-resolved-to headerthis is odd, no? This header field should remain.And regarding that FM Privacy First declaration, this is now 404. 4 replies →
chrisjj 1 month ago "WARNING: Fastmail Masked Email insecurity" https://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=81287 tmarice 1 month ago One concrete vulnerability is mentioned in a linked thread and described here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37791500I have created a ticket with the Fastmail support asking them more details about the vulnerability you mention in your thread, I’m curious to see their response. chrisjj 1 month ago There FM said:> When forwarding an email as an attachment and later checking the headers of the attached email, I could not find the X-resolved-to headerthis is odd, no? This header field should remain.And regarding that FM Privacy First declaration, this is now 404. 4 replies →
tmarice 1 month ago One concrete vulnerability is mentioned in a linked thread and described here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37791500I have created a ticket with the Fastmail support asking them more details about the vulnerability you mention in your thread, I’m curious to see their response. chrisjj 1 month ago There FM said:> When forwarding an email as an attachment and later checking the headers of the attached email, I could not find the X-resolved-to headerthis is odd, no? This header field should remain.And regarding that FM Privacy First declaration, this is now 404. 4 replies →
chrisjj 1 month ago There FM said:> When forwarding an email as an attachment and later checking the headers of the attached email, I could not find the X-resolved-to headerthis is odd, no? This header field should remain.And regarding that FM Privacy First declaration, this is now 404. 4 replies →
"WARNING: Fastmail Masked Email insecurity" https://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=81287
One concrete vulnerability is mentioned in a linked thread and described here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37791500
I have created a ticket with the Fastmail support asking them more details about the vulnerability you mention in your thread, I’m curious to see their response.
There FM said:
> When forwarding an email as an attachment and later checking the headers of the attached email, I could not find the X-resolved-to header
this is odd, no? This header field should remain.
And regarding that FM Privacy First declaration, this is now 404.
4 replies →