3 ms·
sure, but that's not a feature a protocol should have. Because the protocol itself does not interact with it in any way. It's clients that process that javascri
by sleepybrett 4y ago
sure, but that's not a feature a protocol should have. Because the protocol itself does not interact with it in any way. It's clients that process that javascript and execute it. The protocol is about moving 'emails' from one place to another. If you don't want javascript in your email and run your own email stack you can certainly filter out javascript blobs if you want. Or you can chose clients that disable or simply don't even know what javascript is.
- egberts1 4y agoWhile it is a bit late to close the door on JS usage within SMTP protocol, choices of client SMTP becomes paramount given its legacy stage of SMTP protocol.
- sleepybrett 4y agoagain, the protocol should be dumb, its a way to move bytes. If there is js encoded in those bytes the rotocol will not and should not know or care. It's up to a client do decide what it wants to do with the bytes it receives.