[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?
From: |
David Levine |
Subject: |
Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs? |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Feb 2023 06:14:53 -0800 |
Ken wrote:
> But RFC 2045 says in ยง6.2:
>
> Thus there are no
> circumstances in which the "binary" Content-Transfer-Encoding is
> actually valid in Internet mail.
> Also, I am not aware of "binary" being used as a C-T-E at all.
I have received email with C-T-E set to binary. While I don't think it
was needed, I haven't checked closely.
> - Completely handle embedded NULs properly. This is arguably the most
> correct option but would involve a lot of code changes.
This might not be much of a lift. m_getfld might handle NULs in bodies,
and the MIME parser comes close to handling them as well.
mhshow has a test-binary that says that it reads a null byte, but it's
just a space. That should be fixed, but I think that might reveal
(minor?) deficiencies elsewhere.
David
- (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Ken Hornstein, 2023/02/18
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Ken Hornstein, 2023/02/20
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, George Michaelson, 2023/02/20
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Ken Hornstein, 2023/02/21
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Paul Fox, 2023/02/21
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Michael Richardson, 2023/02/21
- Re: (Not-so) hypothetical question: What to do about NULs?, Ken Hornstein, 2023/02/21