(as)  [sysadmin] [blog]

User Tools

Site Tools


html-mail-vs-plain-text

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
html-mail-vs-plain-text [2017-11-05 14:19]
andreas Cosmetics
html-mail-vs-plain-text [2018-06-28 21:25] (current)
andreas + Hanno Böck: [Efail: HTML Mails have no Security Concept and are to blame]
Line 11: Line 11:
     [Kaputte Zitate im Plain-Text von Gmail])     [Kaputte Zitate im Plain-Text von Gmail])
   * Less transparent;​ errors are harder to debug (for users _and_ developers)   * Less transparent;​ errors are harder to debug (for users _and_ developers)
-  * Higher hurdle for first time users (e.g. for newsletters)+  * Higher hurdle for first time users (e.g. for composing ​newsletters)
 * Security hazards (cf. security bug fixes of main mail programs such * Security hazards (cf. security bug fixes of main mail programs such
-  as [Security Advisories for Thunderbird])+  as [Security Advisories for Thunderbird]; cf. [Efail: HTML Mails have no Security Concept and are to blame])
 * Privacy hazards (e.g. HTML is used to track users) * Privacy hazards (e.g. HTML is used to track users)
 * Some automated systems (e.g. mailing lists) do not accept HTML and will * Some automated systems (e.g. mailing lists) do not accept HTML and will
Line 59: Line 59:
 * Wikipedia: * Wikipedia:
   [HTML email](https://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​HTML_email "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​)   [HTML email](https://​en.wikipedia.org/​wiki/​HTML_email "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​)
 +* Hanno Böck: [Efail: HTML Mails have no Security Concept and are to blame]
 +* Jason Rodriguez: [HTML Email and Accessibility | CSS-Tricks](https://​css-tricks.com/​html-email-accessibility/​ "​Accessed 2017-11-22"​) Recommended,​ extensive article published 2017-11-22.
 * LUGA.at thread "Plain Text vs. HTML-Mails"​ * LUGA.at thread "Plain Text vs. HTML-Mails"​
   [October](http://​www.luga.at/​mailing-lists/​luga/​2017/​10/​threads.html#​00041 "​Accessed 2017-11-05"​) +   [October](http://​www.luga.at/​mailing-lists/​luga/​2017/​10/​threads.html#​00041 "​Accessed 2017-11-05"​) +
Line 82: Line 84:
   Published 2014-04-22.   Published 2014-04-22.
 * For historical reference: * For historical reference:
-  [Discussion about HTML in e-mail](https://​people.dsv.su.se/​~jpalme/​ietf/​mhtml-discussion.html "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​) +  ​[Discussion about HTML in e-mail](https://​people.dsv.su.se/​~jpalme/​ietf/​mhtml-discussion.html "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​) 
-  Last revision 1998-05-22.+    Last revision 1998-05-22. 
 +  * [The Ascii Ribbon Campaign official homepage](http://​www.asciiribbon.org/​ "​Accessed 2018-06-28"​) 
 +    from around 2000 or even earlier
  
 [Kaputte Zitate im Plain-Text von Gmail]: http://​www.luga.at/​mailing-lists/​luga/​2017/​10/​msg00005.html "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​ [Kaputte Zitate im Plain-Text von Gmail]: http://​www.luga.at/​mailing-lists/​luga/​2017/​10/​msg00005.html "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​
 [Security Advisories for Thunderbird]:​ https://​www.mozilla.org/​en-US/​security/​known-vulnerabilities/​thunderbird/ ​ "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​ [Security Advisories for Thunderbird]:​ https://​www.mozilla.org/​en-US/​security/​known-vulnerabilities/​thunderbird/ ​ "​Accessed 2017-10-11"​
 [Angry fruit salad]: https://​en.wiktionary.org/​wiki/​angry_fruit_salad "​Accessed 2017-11-04"​ [Angry fruit salad]: https://​en.wiktionary.org/​wiki/​angry_fruit_salad "​Accessed 2017-11-04"​
 +[Efail: HTML Mails have no Security Concept and are to blame]: https://​blog.hboeck.de/​archives/​894-Efail-HTML-Mails-have-no-Security-Concept-and-are-to-blame.html "​Published 2018-06-27, accessed 2018-06-28"​
  
 </​markdown>​ </​markdown>​
  
html-mail-vs-plain-text.1509887986.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017-11-05 14:19 by andreas