abusive changes of person handles (protect your maintainer!)

  Hi Joao!

>There are two issues here:
>- The use of very weak protection methods (NONE and MAIL-FROM) (see *).

  wrt the "see *": 
  I think they do have a point in principle.
  In reality (for many individuals, I suppose :-) it's still more
  staright-forward to fake a mail-from header than reverse-engineer a
  crypted password string in itself.

  However, given the fact that many operatinal environments these days
  require mail to be shipped multi-hop, the risk of disclosing the
  (clear text) password is greater than we might want to believe...

>Would the community see this change in behaviour as a good thing?

  Definitely!

  Wilfried.