There have been a lot of complaints about both the competency and the logic behind the latest Epstein archive release by the DoJ: from censoring the names of co-conspirators to censoring pictures o…
Some of the reactions are some in an effective way, and I assume this example is one of them. The problem being evidently they didn’t think any what might be in big base64 blobs in the PDF, and I guess some of these folks somehow had their email encoded as PDF, which seems bonkers…
I guess the same way email can have html as an attachment for the same thing a plaintext does, evidently some of these mails suggested a mailer actually pdf encoded the email and attached, as well as the plain text.
So when someone replied with plaintext the base64 encoded PDF that they were replying to got ‘quoted’, meaning the unredacted email they were replying to is in there, just messy due to font confusion in the provided format.
Some email programs did that, especially when there was special formatting involved. I seem to recall Thunderbird doing it in the past, as well as outlook.
Has anyone checked if it’s just black text on a black background. That would be in line with the competence level of the Donnie’s administration.
I took a brief look at one and it seems they may have learnt their lesson from the first time around, unfortunately.
Some of the reactions are some in an effective way, and I assume this example is one of them. The problem being evidently they didn’t think any what might be in big base64 blobs in the PDF, and I guess some of these folks somehow had their email encoded as PDF, which seems bonkers…
Doesn’t compute, please explain.
edit: The cache/offline mode as pdf, instead of plaintext mbox or eml?
I guess the same way email can have html as an attachment for the same thing a plaintext does, evidently some of these mails suggested a mailer actually pdf encoded the email and attached, as well as the plain text.
So when someone replied with plaintext the base64 encoded PDF that they were replying to got ‘quoted’, meaning the unredacted email they were replying to is in there, just messy due to font confusion in the provided format.
Or did they just initially export the emails from Outlook as pdfs for the redaction process?
Ah, makes sense, thanks.
Some email programs did that, especially when there was special formatting involved. I seem to recall Thunderbird doing it in the past, as well as outlook.