> (IMHO is the max. line lenght in emails 4000 characters.)
RFC 2821 sec 4.5.3.1 says the max length is 1000 characters including
the two CR LF characters.
However if the MTA fixes this, Cyrus won't see it. Sendmail for example
breaks long lines at 997 characters and inserts ! CR LF.
Joseph B
Klemens Puritscher schrieb:
> Phil Brutsche schrieb:
>
>> The error message is being created by the LMTP service - NUL characters
>> aren't valid in ASCII messages. The email in question is being generated
>> incorrectly somewhere, somehow.
>>
>
> thanks for your reply.
> I know that in the
Phil Brutsche schrieb:
> The error message is being created by the LMTP service - NUL characters
> aren't valid in ASCII messages. The email in question is being generated
> incorrectly somewhere, somehow.
thanks for your reply.
I know that in the email must be a NUL character, but I cannot see t
For the record, this problem is not just caused by viruses and spam.
Where I work, some of our customers are in Japan and China. I have
examples of messages sent via Outlook/Exchange in Japanese and Chinese
which include embedded NUL characters. Rejecting these messages is
simply not an option f
[ On Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 09:38:03 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> I meant they are not readable in cyrus: at least not without my
> patch :-)
Well to be even more pedantic, they're not storable by Cyrus.
Were they t
Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 00:30:46 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
>
>>Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>>
>>nothing actually breaks by removing the nuls. The messges weren't
>>readable before and may not be readable
[ On Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 00:30:46 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> nothing actually breaks by removing the nuls. The messges weren't
> readable before and may not be readable afterwards.
You cannot know that they were not
Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Tuesday, May 10, 2005 at 22:33:43 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
>
>>Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>>
>>by the way, while looking into the code to do the patch, I saw that
>>cyrus already carries out some modifications t
[ On Tuesday, May 10, 2005 at 22:33:43 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> by the way, while looking into the code to do the patch, I saw that
> cyrus already carries out some modifications to messages (example
> removing bare \r and
Aleksandar Milivojevic --> info-cyrus (2005-05-11 10:43:06 -0500):
> John Fawcett wrote:
>
> >by the way, while looking into the code to do the patch, I saw that
> >cyrus already carries out some modifications to messages (example
> >removing bare \r and replacing bare \n with \r\n) so there is a
John Fawcett wrote:
by the way, while looking into the code to do the patch, I saw that
cyrus already carries out some modifications to messages (example
removing bare \r and replacing bare \n with \r\n) so there is a
precedent.
Original Cyrus sources, or RedHat/Fedora SRPMs? I might be wrong
(wo
Douglas K. Fischer wrote:
John Fawcett wrote:
| Greg A. Woods wrote:
|
|> Stripping NUL bytes modifies the message and that's a _REALLY
|> BAD_ thing to do. It is infinitely better to reject than to
|> arbitrarily modify the message in a destructive manner.
|
|
| Maybe I misunderstood earlier post
Douglas K. Fischer wrote:
> John Fawcett wrote:
>
> | Greg A. Woods wrote:
> |
> |> Stripping NUL bytes modifies the message and that's a _REALLY
> |> BAD_ thing to do. It is infinitely better to reject than to
> |> arbitrarily modify the message in a destructive manner.
> |
> |
> | Maybe I misun
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
John Fawcett wrote:
| Greg A. Woods wrote:
|
|> Stripping NUL bytes modifies the message and that's a _REALLY
|> BAD_ thing to do. It is infinitely better to reject than to
|> arbitrarily modify the message in a destructive manner.
|
|
| Maybe I misund
[ On Monday, May 9, 2005 at 20:51:09 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> as I understand it's the nuls in the header/body checks which
> are not supported, not the presence of a nul in the message which
> prevents header/body
Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Sunday, May 8, 2005 at 21:35:58 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
>
>>I am very happy with postfix!
>
>
> Apparently Postfix suffers a design flaw in that its internal dictionary
> lookup API uses NUL-terminated strings so it is not possible for it to
> easily use any r
[ On Sunday, May 8, 2005 at 21:35:58 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> the reason is that at the moment I can have nuls rejected by cyrus
> and potentially bounced to some innocent third party in the case
> of forged sender address
--On May 9, 2005 8:38:48 AM +0200 John Fawcett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Postfix may be compiled with support for PCRE reqular expressions.
Use PCRE in body_check, header_checks to detect and reject NULs.
that's not possible at the moment, unless postfix has changed in
the meantime. See for exampl
John Fawcett wrote:
Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sun, 8 May 2005, Greg A. Woods wrote:
If you can't re-configure or fix your MTA to reject messages that
contain NUL bytes (in either the headers or body -- it's all the same to
SMTP), then get a better mailer
Any idea o
Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 8 May 2005, Greg A. Woods wrote:
>>
>>> If you can't re-configure or fix your MTA to reject messages that
>>> contain NUL bytes (in either the headers or body -- it's all the same to
>>> SMTP), then get a better mailer
>>
>>
>>
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sun, 8 May 2005, Greg A. Woods wrote:
If you can't re-configure or fix your MTA to reject messages that
contain NUL bytes (in either the headers or body -- it's all the same to
SMTP), then get a better mailer
Any idea on how wto set this up with postix?
Postfix may
On Sun, 8 May 2005, Greg A. Woods wrote:
If you can't re-configure or fix your MTA to reject messages that
contain NUL bytes (in either the headers or body -- it's all the same to
SMTP), then get a better mailer
Any idea on how wto set this up with postix?
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Or
Greg A. Woods wrote:
> I don't know why you guys keep beating against this. There's nothing
> wrong with Cyrus and nothing that needs changing in Cyrus.
the reason is that at the moment I can have nuls rejected by cyrus
and potentially bounced to some innocent third party in the case
of forged s
[ On Sunday, May 8, 2005 at 11:44:23 (+0200), John Fawcett wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Message contains NUL characters ...
>
> One further point: what about nuls in message headers?
> As far as I can see spool_copy_msg() handles the body.
> So it doesn't seem that lmtp messa
John Fawcett wrote:
>
> I think the correct place to strip nuls is:
> spool.c: spool_copy_msg
>
> To be consistent should this change also be made to:
> message.c: message_copy_strict
>
> Any other ideas or comments which would help with making a patch?
>
> thanks
> John
I've taken a look at t
Igor Brezac wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Anyone know whether a patch for cyrus to strip out nuls would be
welcome?
Make it clean, and optional (as in either reject the message, or
remove the
NULs...), and I don't see why n
On Mon, 02 May 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
> If I am correct in this interpretation, an MTA which passes them on to
> Cyrus (ie did not generate them but did accept them) is behaving
> correctly?
Of course not. Forwarding and sending are the same thing. The MTA has to
strip NULs (IMHO anyway).
--
David R Bosso wrote:
> --On Thursday, April 28, 2005 4:13 PM -0400 Joseph Brennan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> --On Thursday, April 28, 2005 16:22 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
>>>
Igor Brezac wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Igor Brezac wrote:
>>
>>> They do not need to be patched, just configured correctly.
>>
>>
>> Please elaborate?
>
>
> Someone just mentioned that for postfix you can setup a content filter.
> For sendm
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, David R Bosso wrote:
>
>>So as before, it's illegal to send them.
>
>
> Which means the MTAs have to accept *and strip* them, as forwading is just
> an subcase of sending, IMHO.
>
> Now, if the requirements for a spool (MDA) are the same
It's pretty easy to stop messages with null characters if you use
Mimedefang, a milter. A built-in function called SuspiciousCharsInBody
tags messages with either nulls or bare CR or LF. We've let this go
but since we're testing a Cyrus server it looked like we should
stop them coming in.
We star
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, David R Bosso wrote:
> So as before, it's illegal to send them.
Which means the MTAs have to accept *and strip* them, as forwading is just
an subcase of sending, IMHO.
Now, if the requirements for a spool (MDA) are the same as those for a MTA,
then Cyrus must accept and strip
--On Thursday, April 28, 2005 4:13 PM -0400 Joseph Brennan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--On Thursday, April 28, 2005 16:22 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
could you point to the relevant RFC where it is?
Andrew Morgan wrote:
Maybe I need to read back in this thread to remember, but what was the
suggested solution in Cyrus?
I think Cyrus is correct to bounce these messages back to the sender.
Accepting them seems somewhat dangerous. What happens when parts of
Cyrus or the IMAP protocol see a NU
--On Thursday, April 28, 2005 4:22 PM -0300 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
could you point to the relevant RFC where it is? Considering how
'strict' postfix seems to be, having an RFC to back that up might show
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> >You don't seem to get it. The RFCs forbid NULs. What Cyrus is rejecting
> >may be anything, but an email it is not.
>
> Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
Derrick J Brashear wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
But we really need to do something about the also non-RFC compliant crap
that sends too-big lines as well, cyrus screws up when breaking those
lines.
Is that bug completely fixed yet?
No. If you have a suggestion fo
--On Thursday, April 28, 2005 16:22 -0300 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone mentioned that this was, in fact, not forbid'd in the RFCs ...
could you point to the relevant RFC where it is? Considering how
'strict' postfix seems to be, having an RFC to back that up might show
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Igor Brezac wrote:
They do not need to be patched, just configured correctly.
Please elaborate?
Someone just mentioned that for postfix you can setup a content filter.
For sendmail, add '1' to your mailer flags. It is pretty simple
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Amos wrote:
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
The correct place to do it is in the MTA. Doing it in the MTA means you
get
the trash out before anything else has a chance to bounce it back, log it,
store it, or whatever.
Which doesn't mean I would be against a good patch for
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Igor Brezac wrote:
They do not need to be patched, just configured correctly.
Please elaborate?
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
---
Cyrus Home Page: ht
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 14:57 -0400, Igor Brezac wrote:
> > that not every delivery agent/message store will reject NULs
> > so there is no need for the MTA to strip them out.
>
> So cyrus should also be broken?
I don't know if it's fair to say they're broken; conventional wisdom
says "be strict i
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Amos wrote:
Maybe *ideally* it needs to be fixed by the MTA. However, just casually
following this list and the postfix-users list, whenever the issue of NUL
characters have come up, it has always been centered around Cyrus. I know
that there are folks using Postfix with oth
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
postfix can do it with a content filter. I just wondered whether
there was any chance of a patch being accepted in cyrus?
I mean that would address the problem at it's root instead of
working round it i
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 03:14:22PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Which doesn't mean I would be against a good patch for Cyrus, but I would
> rather the MTAs started either fixing or rejecting all such crap worldwide.
> If exim, sendmail and postfix rejected broken messages, that would
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
The correct place to do it is in the MTA. Doing it in the MTA means you get
the trash out before anything else has a chance to bounce it back, log it,
store it, or whatever.
Which doesn't mean I would be against a good patch for Cyrus, but I would
rather the MTAs
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Igor Brezac wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Anyone know whether a patch for cyrus to strip out nuls would be
welcome?
Make it clean, and optional (as in either reject the message, or
re
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
> postfix can do it with a content filter. I just wondered whether
> there was any chance of a patch being accepted in cyrus?
>
> I mean that would address the problem at it's root instead of
> working round it in n different MTAs.
You don't seem to get it
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
But we really need to do something about the also non-RFC compliant crap
that sends too-big lines as well, cyrus screws up when breaking those lines.
Is that bug completely fixed yet?
No. If you have a suggestion for how to do it without touch
Igor Brezac wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone know whether a patch for cyrus to strip out nuls would be
>>> welcome?
>>
>>
>> Make it clean, and optional (as in either reject the message, or
>> remove the
Igor Brezac wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
>>>
Sometimes I check what I'm discarding and only remember seeing spam.
That could explain the upward trend in these messages (in line with
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Anyone know whether a patch for cyrus to strip out nuls would be
welcome?
Make it clean, and optional (as in either reject the message, or remove the
NULs...), and I don't see why not. The default woul
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
> Anyone know whether a patch for cyrus to strip out nuls would be
> welcome?
Make it clean, and optional (as in either reject the message, or remove the
NULs...), and I don't see why not. The default would need to be reject,
though.
But we really need to
On Thu, 28 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
Sometimes I check what I'm discarding and only remember seeing spam.
That could explain the upward trend in these messages (in line with
the general increase in spam), although I've not seen th
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
>
>> Sometimes I check what I'm discarding and only remember seeing spam.
>> That could explain the upward trend in these messages (in line with
>> the general increase in spam), although I've not seen that and have
>> too small nu
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, John Fawcett wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Michael Sims wrote:
Sometimes I check what I'm discarding and only remember seeing spam.
That could explain the upward trend in these messages (in line with
the general increase in spam), although I've not seen that and have
too small n
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Michael Sims wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>> Apr 24 15:29:02 hub postfix/lmtp[54800]: 0367A1298D0:
>>> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp],
>>> delay=273190, status=bounced (host
>>> /var/run/socket/lmtp
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Michael Sims wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Apr 24 15:29:02 hub postfix/lmtp[54800]: 0367A1298D0:
to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp],
delay=273190, status=bounced (host
/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp] said: 554 5.6.0 Message
cont
Derrick J Brashear wrote:
Well, there's also the possibility as we discussed in October that your
mta is passing (too) long (to be compliant) lines to cyrus, and the
logic doesn't distinguish and prints the same error.
FYI, WebCT (Campus Edition) also triggers this problem.
If an instructor has
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Michael Sims wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
Apr 24 15:29:02 hub postfix/lmtp[54800]: 0367A1298D0:
to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp],
delay=273190, status=bounced (host
/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp] said: 554 5.6.0 Message
cont
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> Apr 24 15:29:02 hub postfix/lmtp[54800]: 0367A1298D0:
> to=<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, relay=/var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp],
> delay=273190, status=bounced (host
> /var/run/socket/lmtp[/var/run/socket/lmtp] said: 554 5.6.0 Message
> contains NUL characters (in reply t
Andrew Dietz wrote:
Naturally, I am inclined to allow messages with NUL characters to be
delivered, as bouncing legitimate messages to unsuspecting, technically
unsavvy senders is not an option.
How can I have Cyrus ignore NUL characters in messages?
You'd probably need to edit Cyrus source code an
On Fri, 2004-02-20 at 03:02, Rafel Amer wrote:
> Message contains NUL characters (in reply to end of DATA command))
>
> Does anybody know how I can solve this problem?
Fix the mail client? Perhaps an updated version of Outlook might help.
What version of Outlook are you using? Alternately, is it
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Rafel Amer wrote:
> /var/lib/cyrus/socket/lmtp[/var/lib/cyrus/socket/lmtp] said: 554 5.6.0
> Message contains NUL characters (in reply to end of DATA command))
>
> Does anybody know how I can solve this problem?
Get your MTA to strip NULs from "messages". Note that somethin
64 matches
Mail list logo
