Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Anthony J. Bentley wrote: > Michael Richardson writes: >> And given EFAIL, it seems that we were wise. > nmh wise? I dunno. Part of EFAIL was that the mail client downloaded > bits from the Internet and interleaved them seamlessly into the > message. No,

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ralph wrote: > This seems to work here. > > nmh-access-url: printf '\e[31;1mexternal-body: %q\n' Perfect, thanks! David -- nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

I'm definitely in favor of, by default, disabling anything that causes automatic external data fetches to sites I might be unaware of! Bob On Sun, 27 May 2018 10:15:29 -0400 Ken Hornstein sez: > >> I don't know. History, probably. > >> We used

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>> I don't know. History, probably. >> We used to assume everyone played nice. > >nmh-access-{ftp,url} were added less than 4 years ago. Ken, should we >revisit? I don't have strong feelings, the only messages I've received >that use it are from you and Ralph. So, I read Anthony's email, and

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi David, > Alright, the user could call a script to sanitize the URL. > Or not display it, such as by prepending with /bin/true. This seems to work here. nmh-access-url: printf '\e[31;1mexternal-body: %q\n' -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy -- nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ralph wrote: > Content-Type: message/external-body; access-type="url"; > url="http://^[[39;1mexample^[[0m.org/^[[8;24;40t; Alright, the user could call a script to sanitize the URL. Or not display it, such as by prepending with /bin/true. David -- nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi David, > nmh-access-url: echo ^[[31\;1mSuppressed loading of Thanks. -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy -- nmh-workers https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Anthony, > - It leaks the IP address of my mail client simply by reading an > email. IIRC that was the motivation for me trying it; how many distinct IP addresses hit the URL. Related to your point, I could know the recipient viewed the email three times a couple of days ago, once from

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken Hornstein writes: > Respectfully ... the vulnerability with EFAIL was NOT that people downloaded > stuff via HTTP. I suppose I shouldn't say that *was* the vulnerability; but if mail clients didn't fetch URLs embedded in the mail by default, EFAIL would not have been possible. > To the

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>Michael Richardson writes: >> And given EFAIL, it seems that we were wise. > >nmh wise? I dunno. Part of EFAIL was that the mail client downloaded >bits from the Internet and interleaved them seamlessly into the message. >That seems like an inherently dangerous thing to do... and nmh does it

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ralph wrote: > Hi Anthony, > > How do I disable this behavior > > Possibly by nobbling nmh-access-url in an mhn.defaults, e.g. /etc/nmh, Or, add these to your profile: nmh-access-ftp: echo ^[[31\;1mSuppressed loading of nmh-access-url: echo ^[[31\;1mSuppressed loading of The ANSI control

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Anthony, > Part of EFAIL was that the mail client downloaded bits from the > Internet and interleaved them seamlessly into the message. IIRC it was that different adjacent parts were catenated if both text/html before being sent to something to interpret the HTML. This meant the join could

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Michael Richardson writes: > And given EFAIL, it seems that we were wise. nmh wise? I dunno. Part of EFAIL was that the mail client downloaded bits from the Internet and interleaved them seamlessly into the message. That seems like an inherently dangerous thing to do... and nmh does it with one

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi, Michael Richards, message ID <2726.1527268876@localhost>: ~ > And given EFAIL, it seems that we were wise. Or not? I've been surprised by the odd bit of decoding nmh has done for MIME parts, giving a text summary of the content. I

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

On Fri, 25 May 2018 20:39:26 -0400 Ken Hornstein sez: > >Count me as another one of those few people who actually uses the > >text/plain content. :-) For the most part, I don't read emails that are > >HTML only unless I absolutely have to and if there's a text/plain

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken wrote: > I don't know why they > even bother to generate such a lousy text/plain part, but this is the > world we live in. One airline based in America sends empty (just the newline) text/plain parts in their purchase confirmation messages: $ mhlist -noheader 65

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Jón, > Ken writes: > > I've seen a distressing number of times when the text/plain version > > of a multipart/alternative message is not useful. Yesterday's fun was working out why a `reset your password' URL didn't work. Fill in the web page, submit, `Please correct the highlighted errors',

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Tom, > > sed 's/$/\n/' "$@" | > > Another idiom is: sed -eG. Oh yes, that's better. > > fmt -su | > > Interesting switches for fmt. Well, I thought you could play around with what you prefer. It's GNU fmt, which has annoying behaviour. Bring back _Software Tools_! $ yes foo |

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken Hornstein writes: > My larger point is that, sadly, I've seen a distressing number of times > when the text/plain version of a multipart/alternative message is not > useful. I really wish people who have a shitty text/plain part would > simply NOT bother and just generate

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>Count me as another one of those few people who actually uses the >text/plain content. :-) For the most part, I don't read emails that are >HTML only unless I absolutely have to and if there's a text/plain I >manage with that unless it's terrible. My original draft of that email

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Ralph: I appreciate your examples below, my comments about them are to show, I'm more or less following them. I'll probably use ideas from them in future bash functions. On Thu 5/24/18 14:56 +0100 Ralph Corderoy wrote: > > For the yahoo email client, no word wrapping is added to the

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Andy Bradford wrote: >> So, I don't think this is necessarily a nmh problem, like I said. From >> a practical standpoint, you're probably one of the few people who >> actually USES the text/plain content instead of the text/html content. > Count me

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Andy, > > you're probably one of the few people who actually USES the > > text/plain > > Count me as another one of those few people #MeToo. Given mhshow(1)'s -prefer, it's quite easy. -- Cheers, Ralph. https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy -- nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Thus said Ken Hornstein on Thu, 24 May 2018 19:28:25 -0400: > So, I don't think this is necessarily a nmh problem, like I said. From > a practical standpoint, you're probably one of the few people who > actually USES the text/plain content instead of the text/html content. Count me as

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>> Oh, good point; I had looked at mhfixmsg but it didn't seem like that >> would have worked (but maybe it wasn't obvious to me how to make that >> work). > >mhfixmsg has a -replacetextplain switch. But the html-to-text conversion >is based on whatever the external converter does. Maybe pipe it

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken wrote: > Oh, good point; I had looked at mhfixmsg but it didn't seem like that > would have worked (but maybe it wasn't obvious to me how to make that > work). mhfixmsg has a -replacetextplain switch. But the html-to-text conversion is based on whatever the external converter does. Maybe

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>> From a practical standpoint, you're probably one of the few people who >> actually USES the text/plain content instead of the text/html content. > >> So, solutions? > >Given your discovery the the text/html looks good, another possibility >might be to use it via repl's -convertargs switch.

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken wrote: > From a practical standpoint, you're probably one of the few people who > actually USES the text/plain content instead of the text/html content. > So, solutions? Given your discovery the the text/html looks good, another possibility might be to use it via repl's -convertargs switch.

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Tom, > For the yahoo email client, no word wrapping is added to the received > email, ie. there are no '\n's within the received paragraph (unlike > gmail). Most importantly, for the yahoo client, each paragraph in the > body of the original has to end in '\n\n\n' in order for there to be a >

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

On Wed 5/23/18 10:24 -0400 Ken Hornstein wrote: > >I agree it may not be a bug; it may be something in my nmh (or other?) > >config files. I'm running fedora 27, with sendmail/procmail/rcvstore. > > So what EXACTLY is this bug you are reporting? I think that is the > thing I don't understand.

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Ken wrote: > So what EXACTLY is this bug you are reporting? I think that is the > thing I don't understand. +1 Tom, I assume you're not using repl -convertargs. And my guess is that your issue is on the repl side. I don't thing there have been any significant changes to rcvstore in the last

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

>I agree it may not be a bug; it may be something in my nmh (or other?) >config files. I'm running fedora 27, with sendmail/procmail/rcvstore. So what EXACTLY is this bug you are reporting? I think that is the thing I don't understand. --Ken -- nmh-workers

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

On Wed 5/23/18 9:23 -0400 Ken Hornstein wrote: > >I have saved two example emails from two people I know, received after > >my nmh 1.71 upgrade, with plain text content that have **no newlines** > >in between paragraphs. My understanding is these authors are lay > >people that write paragraphs

Re: [nmh-workers] post 1.71 ug: "long line"/single newline paragraphs

Hi Tom, > I have saved two example emails Can we see a part of the body from the mail's file for the detail. If it's sensitive, run it through tr A-Za-z a <`mhpath .` | tr 0-9 0 SMTP has a line-length limit and some MTAs, e.g. Sendmail, will forcibly split lines that are too long,