------------------------------------------------------------
revno: 1510
fixes bug: https://launchpad.net/bugs/1407098
committer: Mark Sapiro <m...@msapiro.net>
branch nick: 2.1
timestamp: Sat 2015-01-03 17:14:55 -0800
message:
When applying DMARC mitigations, CookHeaders now adds the original From:
to Cc: rather than Reply-To: in some cases to make MUA 'reply' and
'reply all' more consistent with the non-DMARC cases.
modified:
Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py
NEWS
tests/test_handlers.py
--
lp:mailman/2.1
https://code.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1
Your team Mailman Checkins is subscribed to branch lp:mailman/2.1.
To unsubscribe from this branch go to
https://code.launchpad.net/~mailman-coders/mailman/2.1/+edit-subscription
=== modified file 'Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py'
--- Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py 2014-05-12 00:54:13 +0000
+++ Mailman/Handlers/CookHeaders.py 2015-01-04 01:14:55 +0000
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Copyright (C) 1998-2014 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+# Copyright (C) 1998-2015 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
@@ -15,7 +15,10 @@
# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301,
# USA.
-"""Cook a message's Subject header."""
+"""Cook a message's Subject header.
+Also do other manipulations of From:, Reply-To: and Cc: depending on
+list configuration.
+"""
from __future__ import nested_scopes
import re
@@ -68,7 +71,7 @@
if ((msgdata.get('from_is_list') == 2 or
(msgdata.get('from_is_list') == 0 and mlist.from_is_list == 2)) and
not msgdata.get('_fasttrack')
- ) or name.lower() in ('from', 'reply-to'):
+ ) or name.lower() in ('from', 'reply-to', 'cc'):
msgdata.setdefault('add_header', {})[name] = value
elif repl or not msg.has_key(name):
if delete:
@@ -154,6 +157,23 @@
# augment it. RFC 2822 allows max one Reply-To: header so collapse them
# if we're adding a value, otherwise don't touch it. (Should we collapse
# in all cases?)
+ # MAS: We need to do some things with the original From: if we've munged
+ # it for DMARC mitigation. We have goals for this process which are
+ # not completely compatible, so we do the best we can. Our goals are:
+ # 1) as long as the list is not anonymous, the original From: address
+ # should be obviously exposed, i.e. not just in a header that MUAs
+ # don't display.
+ # 2) the original From: address should not be in a comment or display
+ # name in the new From: because it is claimed that multiple domains
+ # in any fields in From: are indicative of spamminess. This means
+ # it should be in Reply-To: or Cc:.
+ # 3) the behavior of an MUA doing a 'reply' or 'reply all' should be
+ # consistent regardless of whether or not the From: is munged.
+ # Goal 3) implies sometimes the original From: should be in Reply-To:
+ # and sometimes in Cc:, and even so, this goal won't be achieved in
+ # all cases with all MUAs. In cases of conflict, the above ordering of
+ # goals is priority order.
+
if not fasttrack:
# A convenience function, requires nested scopes. pair is (name, addr)
new = []
@@ -171,13 +191,20 @@
# the original Reply-To:'s to the list we're building up. In both
# cases we'll zap the existing field because RFC 2822 says max one is
# allowed.
+ o_rt = False
if not mlist.first_strip_reply_to:
orig = msg.get_all('reply-to', [])
for pair in getaddresses(orig):
+ # There's an original Reply-To: and we're not removing it.
add(pair)
- # We also need to put the old From: in Reply-To: in all cases.
- if o_from:
+ o_rt = True
+ # We also need to put the old From: in Reply-To: in all cases where
+ # it is not going in Cc:. This is when reply_goes_to_list == 0 and
+ # either there was no original Reply-To: or we stripped it.
+ if o_from and mlist.reply_goes_to_list == 0 and not o_rt:
add(o_from)
+ # Flag that we added it.
+ o_from = None
# Set Reply-To: header to point back to this list. Add this last
# because some folks think that some MUAs make it easier to delete
# addresses from the right than from the left.
@@ -206,13 +233,19 @@
# because even though the list address is in From:, the Reply-To:
# poster will override it. Brain dead MUAs may then address the list
# twice on a 'reply all', but reasonable MUAs should do the right
- # thing.
- if (mlist.personalize == 2 and mlist.reply_goes_to_list <> 1 and
- not mlist.anonymous_list):
+ # thing. We also add the original From: to Cc: if it wasn't added
+ # to Reply-To:
+ add_list = (mlist.personalize == 2 and
+ mlist.reply_goes_to_list <> 1 and
+ not mlist.anonymous_list)
+ if add_list or o_from:
# Watch out for existing Cc headers, merge, and remove dups. Note
# that RFC 2822 says only zero or one Cc header is allowed.
new = []
d = {}
+ # If we're adding the original From:, add it first.
+ if o_from:
+ add(o_from)
# AvoidDuplicates may have set a new Cc: in msgdata.add_header,
# so check that.
if (msgdata.has_key('add_header') and
@@ -222,8 +255,9 @@
else:
for pair in getaddresses(msg.get_all('cc', [])):
add(pair)
- i18ndesc = uheader(mlist, mlist.description, 'Cc')
- add((str(i18ndesc), mlist.GetListEmail()))
+ if add_list:
+ i18ndesc = uheader(mlist, mlist.description, 'Cc')
+ add((str(i18ndesc), mlist.GetListEmail()))
change_header('Cc',
COMMASPACE.join([formataddr(pair) for pair in new]),
mlist, msg, msgdata)
=== modified file 'NEWS'
--- NEWS 2014-12-20 19:59:12 +0000
+++ NEWS 2015-01-04 01:14:55 +0000
@@ -40,6 +40,10 @@
Bug fixes and other patches
+ - When applying DMARC mitigations, CookHeaders now adds the original From:
+ to Cc: rather than Reply-To: in some cases to make MUA 'reply' and
+ 'reply all' more consistent with the non-DMARC cases. (LP: #1407098)
+
- The Subject: of the list welcome message wasn't always in the user's
preferred language. Fixed. (LP: #1400988)
=== modified file 'tests/test_handlers.py'
--- tests/test_handlers.py 2014-05-02 17:21:48 +0000
+++ tests/test_handlers.py 2015-01-04 01:14:55 +0000
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# Copyright (C) 2001-2014 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+# Copyright (C) 2001-2015 by the Free Software Foundation, Inc.
#
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
@@ -614,8 +614,11 @@
msgdata = {}
CookHeaders.process(mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'aper...@dom.ain, _xt...@dom.ain')
+ '_xt...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), None)
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
def test_reply_to_list_with_strip(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -647,8 +650,12 @@
msgdata = {}
CookHeaders.process(mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'aper...@dom.ain, _xt...@dom.ain')
+ '_xt...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), ['bper...@dom.ain'])
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
+
def test_reply_to_explicit(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -678,8 +685,11 @@
msgdata = {}
CookHeaders.process(mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'ml...@dom.ain, aper...@dom.ain')
+ 'ml...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), None)
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
def test_reply_to_explicit_with_strip(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -715,8 +725,11 @@
CookHeaders.process(self._mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'ml...@dom.ain, aper...@dom.ain')
+ 'ml...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), ['bper...@dom.ain'])
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
def test_reply_to_extends_to_list(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -750,7 +763,11 @@
CookHeaders.process(mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'bper...@dom.ain, aper...@dom.ain, _xt...@dom.ain')
+ 'bper...@dom.ain, _xt...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), ['bper...@dom.ain'])
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
def test_reply_to_extends_to_explicit(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -784,7 +801,11 @@
msgdata = {}
CookHeaders.process(mlist, msg, msgdata)
eq(msgdata['add_header']['Reply-To'],
- 'ml...@dom.ain, bper...@dom.ain, aper...@dom.ain')
+ 'ml...@dom.ain, bper...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msgdata['add_header']['Cc'],
+ 'aper...@dom.ain')
+ eq(msg.get_all('reply-to'), ['bper...@dom.ain'])
+ eq(msg.get_all('cc'), None)
def test_list_headers_nolist(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -980,7 +1001,8 @@
Content-Disposition: inline
footer
---BOUNDARY--""")
+--BOUNDARY--
+""")
def test_image(self):
eq = self.assertEqual
@@ -1749,7 +1771,8 @@
class TestSpamDetect(TestBase):
def test_short_circuit(self):
msgdata = {'approved': 1}
- rtn = SpamDetect.process(self._mlist, None, msgdata)
+ msg = email.message_from_string('')
+ rtn = SpamDetect.process(self._mlist, msg, msgdata)
# Not really a great test, but there's little else to assert
self.assertEqual(rtn, None)
_______________________________________________
Mailman-checkins mailing list
Mailman-checkins@python.org
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-checkins/archive%40jab.org
