From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/52062 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Simon Josefsson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Another problem with rfc2047 encoding Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 14:46:02 +0200 Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu Message-ID: References: <8765ovcgt1.fsf-theta-@daphne.gnuu.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1051793116 28478 80.91.224.249 (1 May 2003 12:45:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:45:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M605@lists.math.uh.edu Thu May 01 14:45:10 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19BDR0-0007OM-00 for ; Thu, 01 May 2003 14:45:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 19BDS5-0001eu-00; Thu, 01 May 2003 07:46:17 -0500 Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com ([64.157.176.121]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 19BDS1-0001ep-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Thu, 01 May 2003 07:46:13 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 56895 invoked by alias); 1 May 2003 12:46:12 -0000 Original-Received: (qmail 56890 invoked from network); 1 May 2003 12:46:12 -0000 Original-Received: from 178.230.13.217.in-addr.dgcsystems.net (HELO yxa.extundo.com) (217.13.230.178) by sclp3.sclp.com with SMTP; 1 May 2003 12:46:12 -0000 Original-Received: from latte.josefsson.org (yxa.extundo.com [217.13.230.178]) (authenticated bits=0) by yxa.extundo.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h41Ck2bU014725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK); Thu, 1 May 2003 14:46:03 +0200 Original-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F8rn?= Mork Mail-Copies-To: nobody X-Payment: hashcash 1.2 0:030501:bmork@dod.no:52407c7caa2a4216 X-Hashcash: 0:030501:bmork@dod.no:52407c7caa2a4216 X-Payment: hashcash 1.2 0:030501:ding@gnus.org:1be2339932f37d4f X-Hashcash: 0:030501:ding@gnus.org:1be2339932f37d4f In-Reply-To: =?iso-8859-1?q?(Bj=F8rn?= Mork's message of "Thu, 01 May 2003 10:15:57 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.09002 (Oort Gnus v0.20) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:52062 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:52062 Bjørn Mork writes: > ding@daphne.gnuu.de (Thomas Hühn) writes: > >> In the following article... >> >> From: Ralf =?ISO-8859-1?Q?D=F6blitz?= <=?iso-8859-1?q?d=F6blitz?=@doeblitz.net> >> Newsgroups: de.admin.news.misc >> Subject: Re: Reflektoren und RFC822 >> Date: 16 Apr 2003 19:01:20 GMT >> Message-ID: >> >> ...the localpart seems to be interpreted, though it shouldn't. >> >> RFC 2047 states in section 5(3): >> "An 'encoded-word' MUST NOT appear in any portion of an 'addr-spec'." > > True, but I wonder... How should Gnus handle an illegal address like > that? Quote it, warn the user and try to send anyway if the user > insists? Or just refuse it unconitionally to avoid having people > believe they can get away with such addresses? How does Gnus know it is an illegal address? Perhaps someone has an local-part that is =?iso-8859-1?q?d=F6blitz?=, I believe it is a legal RFC 822 local-part. IMHO Gnus should not alter local-parts when replying to a message. > But there are cases where Gnus will happily violate RFC2047 even when > fed valid input. For example, if I reply to myself (not that I really > *do* that :-), Gnus will create an In-Reply-To field like this: > > In-Reply-To: > =?iso-8859-1?q?(Bj=F8rn?= Mork's message of "Thu, 01 May 2003 10:00:22 > +0200") > > The In-Reply-To field is a structured field, and the text added after > the message-id is a comment. Which is perfectly OK, given that CFWS > is allowed there. But when encoding it, Gnus screws up and the result > is a violation of RFC2047 and RFC2822. The comment delimiters should > not be part of the encoded word. > > One strange thing to notice is that Gnus will correctly encode a > comment in the From field (and possibly other structured fields?) I > don't know why. Apparently the rfc2047.el encoder is buggy, Dave Love reported this and he had a fix for it too but it doesn't apply any more.