[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > Truncation of UTF-8 is actually slightly worse than has been described. > > It is possible to determine from the UTF-8 octets where one coded > character ends and another begins. But because Unicode contains > combining characters, with no limit on how many of these there can > be, and these modify the meaning of previous or later coded characters, > it is not possible to determine where one 'symbol' ends. So truncation > at a UTF-8 boundary could subtlety change the meaning of a message, > even breach security. Not something we can guard against > but should mention.
The above seems a little confused to me. How can there be a problem if a message is truncated on the boundary of complex character ? Darren _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
