On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 07:33:01PM +0800, Tao pilgrim wrote: > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 4:41 PM Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 11/30/22 14:01, chengkaitao wrote: > > > From: chengkaitao <pilgrimtao@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > Yikes! Another patch from ZTE guys. > > > > I'm suspicious to patches sent from them due to bad reputation with > > kernel development community. First, they sent all patches via > > cgel.zte@xxxxxxxxx (listed in Cc) but Greg can't sure these are really > > sent from them ([1] & [2]). Then they tried to workaround by sending > > from their personal Gmail accounts, again with same response from him > > [3]. And finally they sent spoofed emails (as he pointed out in [4]) - > > they pretend to send from ZTE domain but actually sent from their > > different domain (see raw message and look for X-Google-Original-From: > > header. > > Hi Bagas Sanjaya, > > I'm not an employee of ZTE, just an ordinary developer. I really don't know > all the details about community and ZTE, The reason why I cc cgel.zte@xxxxxxxxx > is because the output of the script <get_maintainer.pl> has the > address <cgel.zte@xxxxxxxxx>. > > If there is any error in the format of the email, I will try my best > to correct it. > OK, thanks for clarification. At first I thought you were ZTE guys. Sorry for inconvenience. Now I ask: why do your email seem spoofed (sending from your gmail account but there is extra gmail-specific header that makes you like "sending" from your corporate email address? Wouldn't it be nice (and appropriate) if you can send and receive email with the latter address instead? Thanks. -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
