On 2002-02-08, 11:24:57 (+1100), Peter Williams wrote:
> I email to bugs however I figured I should email here too.
> I've upgraded to 1.48 from 1.45. since then I've found that some
> UUencoded attachments are being corrupted.
I'm looking into this and a few other uuencode-related issues at the
moment. Sorry I didn't reply to your initial bug report, I get alot
Your problem is basically that your uuencoded attachments aren't being
recognized as uuencoded by the sanitizer, because the begin line is
"begin 0 blabla" instead of "begin 000 blabla". Since the sanitizer
doesn't recognized the uuencoded content as being uuencoded, it
proceeds to HTML-defang it uuencoded content, leading to the problems
This can actually be considered a feature, not a bug, since if the
sanitizer doesn't detect the uuencoded attachment, then it may have
avoided your security policies and corrupting it is the "safe" thing
to do. ;-) There's always a silver lining...
Anyway, improvements I'm considering for 1.49 to deal with this, and
- Make the uuencode detection accept single digit file modes or even
null modes (begin filename), instead mandating 3 or 4 digit modes
as it currently does. This makes it compatible with what some
(all?) stupid versions of Outlook do.
- Make the uuencode detection perform a look-ahead, to check if the
following line really is uuencoded content, to decrease the odds of
falsely entering uuencoded-mode. *If* a "begin mode name" is
detected but not teally followed by uuencoded content, then escape
the line so Outlook won't think it's an attachment.
- Possibly disable HTML defanging of unrecognized/overlong tags
within parts which aren't clearly recognized as HTML.
An explanation of this silliness (and some other rather funny
information as well) is here:
-- Bjarni R. Einarsson PGP: 02764305, B7A3AB89 email@example.com -><- http://bre.klaki.net/
Check out my open-source email sanitizer: http://mailtools.anomy.net/ Spammers, please send plenty of email to: firstname.lastname@example.org