User-Agent: Mozilla/5.1 (Amiga; U; sparc; en-US) Yeah that's the ticket Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3b) When sorting mail messages by date in the view pane, the date contained in the "Date:" header of the message is used. This header is completely unrealiable since it is set by the sender. Self-reported timestamps weeks, months, and even years in the past (or future) commonly occur. Spammers sometimes manipulate timestamps in this way, but it also happens with some older email clients that set the Date header incorrectly after Y2K. The end result is a date sort can cause newly received messages to be placed at the bottom of the sort list (or other non-obvious places). A better method is to use the transaction date from the last SMTP Received header, which is controlled by the user's smtp server. Even the timestamp Mozilla adds when downloading a message is more reliable than the Date header (though it's still not advisable; this causes misleading dates when mail is checked infrequently, or when several messages are downloaded at once and each receives the same timestamp). Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Send an email to yourself with a Date header in the past (e.g. Jab 4 2001) 2. Download the message into your mozilla mail client 3. Sort the messages by date Actual Results: The new message was placed at the bottom of the sort list with very old messages. Expected Results: Should have appeared near the top of the sort list with other new messages.
I see this behavior in 1.4b Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030408 To easily reproduce in Mozilla, change the pref mail.compose.other.header to the string "Date"; then you can compose a message and select Date as one of the headers. I pasted in a date from an old message verbatim, since I don't know how much variety is allowed in this field's formatting. Reporter, if you change the Severity of this bug to "enhancement" I'll confirm it. It looks like a good idea to me.
Actually, this is a dupe: Bug 166254
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 166254 ***
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → DUPLICATE
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.