From 0b5fe14643dbfde02f7aaf4dbb0872f8c927034c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eirik Byrkjeflot Anonsen Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 16:22:30 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Re: Automatic suppression of non-duplicate messages --- 36/40e8f902048d74492cd86d1e26a766f2754977 | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+) create mode 100644 36/40e8f902048d74492cd86d1e26a766f2754977 diff --git a/36/40e8f902048d74492cd86d1e26a766f2754977 b/36/40e8f902048d74492cd86d1e26a766f2754977 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..32dd8000b --- /dev/null +++ b/36/40e8f902048d74492cd86d1e26a766f2754977 @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@ +Return-Path: +X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10915431FB6 + for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 07:22:37 -0800 (PST) +X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: -0.7 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled +Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id H70w1aOy7vaT for ; + Mon, 5 Nov 2012 07:22:33 -0800 (PST) +Received: from atmail.labs2.com (atmail.labs2.com [93.182.166.49]) + (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D59E431FAE + for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2012 07:22:33 -0800 (PST) +Received: from [178.74.1.248] (helo=star.eba) + by atmail.labs2.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) + (envelope-from ) id 1TVOVN-0000xq-7d + for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:22:25 +0100 +Received: from eirik by star.eba with local (Exim 4.80) + (envelope-from ) id 1TVOVS-0001l0-UG + for notmuch@notmuchmail.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:22:30 +0100 +From: Eirik Byrkjeflot Anonsen +To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +Subject: Re: Automatic suppression of non-duplicate messages +References: <87mwyz3s9d.fsf@star.eba> <87390qxvb4.fsf@maritornes.cs.unb.ca> + <87390pf14v.fsf@nikula.org> +Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:22:30 +0100 +In-Reply-To: <87390pf14v.fsf@nikula.org> (Jani Nikula's message of "Mon, 05 + Nov 2012 00:34:40 +0200") +Message-ID: <87sj8ot6q1.fsf@star.eba> +User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +X-ACL-Warn: Authenticated as: Sent as: eirik@eirikba.org +X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 +Precedence: list +List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." + +List-Unsubscribe: , + +List-Archive: +List-Post: +List-Help: +List-Subscribe: , + +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 15:22:37 -0000 + +Jani Nikula writes: + +> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012, David Bremner wrote: +>> Offhand I'm not sure of a good method of automatically deciding what is +>> the same message (with e.g. headers and footer text added by a mailing +>> list). +> +> Assuming there was good method, what would you do with two different +> messages that have the same message id? That is the unique id we use to +> identify messages (which should be fine per RFC 5322 and its +> predecessors; we're talking about messages from broken systems here). + +We're also talking about data from "untrusted" sources. Assuming that +such data is always non-broken seems overly optimistic. (See +e.g. http://cr.yp.to/immhf/thread.html, the section "Security and +reliability issues" for one view on the matter.) + +In fact, I'd say that it should be a design goal for any mail client to +deal with as much invalid input as possible. Show big, fat warning +messages if you want to, but don't just drop the message and pretend it +does not exist. + +eirik -- 2.26.2