You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@spamassassin.apache.org by Benny Pedersen <me...@junc.eu> on 2018/05/22 17:36:53 UTC
lint error ?
header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:address =~ /,/
imho its
header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:addr =~ /,/
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_misc_testing.cf?view=diff&r1=1831981&r2=1831982&pathrev=1831982
Re: lint error ?
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Wed, 23 May 2018, RW wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2018 10:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
> John Hardin wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 May 2018, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>>
>>> header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:address =~ /,/
>>>
>>> imho its
>>>
>>> header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:addr =~ /,/
>>
>> I have a fairly thorough lint check that disables various plugins
>> that I run before committing changes. It passes lint here...
>>
>> That said, fixing for consistency.
>
> It's more than cosmetic. From a quick look at the code I think that
> even though it passes lint, :address would just be ignored.
>
> The rule would still work most of the time, but would FP occasionally,
> e.g. on display names like "Smith, John".
Yeah, after some testing I found that you can't rely on lint to catch
that. It happily accepts anything (like ":fnord"). :(
Opening a boog.
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The third basic rule of firearms safety:
Keep your booger hook off the bang switch!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
418 days since the first commercial re-flight of an orbital booster (SpaceX)
Re: lint error ?
Posted by RW <rw...@googlemail.com>.
On Tue, 22 May 2018 10:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
John Hardin wrote:
> On Tue, 22 May 2018, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>
> > header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:address =~ /,/
> >
> > imho its
> >
> > header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:addr =~ /,/
>
> I have a fairly thorough lint check that disables various plugins
> that I run before committing changes. It passes lint here...
>
> That said, fixing for consistency.
It's more than cosmetic. From a quick look at the code I think that
even though it passes lint, :address would just be ignored.
The rule would still work most of the time, but would FP occasionally,
e.g. on display names like "Smith, John".
Re: lint error ?
Posted by John Hardin <jh...@impsec.org>.
On Tue, 22 May 2018, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:address =~ /,/
>
> imho its
>
> header __REPTO_MULTI_ADDR Reply-To:addr =~ /,/
I have a fairly thorough lint check that disables various plugins that I
run before committing changes. It passes lint here...
That said, fixing for consistency.
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/spamassassin/trunk/rulesrc/sandbox/jhardin/20_misc_testing.cf?view=diff&r1=1831981&r2=1831982&pathrev=1831982
--
John Hardin KA7OHZ http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/
jhardin@impsec.org FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a jhardin@impsec.org
key: 0xB8732E79 -- 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know things are bad when Pravda says we [the USA] have gone
too far to the left. -- Joe Huffman
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
418 days since the first commercial re-flight of an orbital booster (SpaceX)