perlbug-followup at perl
Sep 14, 2012, 6:26 PM
Post #1 of 2
(55 views)
Permalink
|
|
[perl #38387] Net::Cmd does not handle CR and LF correctly
|
|
On Mon May 21 18:59:26 2012, jkeenan wrote:
> On Fri Dec 09 12:52:11 2011, sprout wrote:
> > On Sun Dec 04 06:28:28 2011, jkeenan wrote:
> > > On Tue Jan 31 14:28:54 2006, alexander_bluhm [at] genua wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The escaping of CR and LF in Net::Cmd->dataend is somewhat broken.
> > > > A sequence "a\r" is escaped as "a\015\015\012.\015\012".
> > > > There is even a test for this behavior. But it does not conform
> > > > to RFC 2821 Section 2.3.7:
> > > >
> > > > In addition, the appearance of "bare" "CR" or "LF" characters in
> > > > text
> > > > (i.e., either without the other) has a long history of causing
> > > > problems in mail implementations and applications that use
the mail
> > > > system as a tool. SMTP client implementations MUST NOT transmit
> > > > these characters except when they are intended as line
terminators
> > > > and then MUST, as indicated above, transmit them only as a <CRLF>
> > > > sequence.
> > > >
> > > > So sending the sequence "\015\015" is illegal because the first
> > > > "\015" is not followed by a "\012".
> > > >
> > > > I have made a patch for that bug. I have also added a lot of other
> > > > test cases to the t/datasend.t test. I wrote these tests, after
> > > > we had encountered real world SMTP problems with different versions
> > > > of Net::Cmd.
> > > >
> > >
> > > My layperson's impression is that the original poster's criticism of
> > > Net::Cmd::datasend() with respect to RFC 2821 Sec 2.3.7 is correct.
> > > (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt). I modified the patch to
apply to
> > > blead; see attached. I haven't examined the tests in detail, but they
> > PASS.
> > >
> > > Of course, Perl code in the wild may have adapted to the
suboptimal code
> > > in datasend(), so we have to evaluate this carefully. Please review.
> >
> > This distribution is listed in Maintainers.pl with upstream as ‘undef’,
> > meaning that its status has yet to be discussed.
> >
>
> When and where does such a discussion take place?
1. That question still stands, four months later.
2. Should the patch be applied?
Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan
---
via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: open
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38387
|
