Serious bug report and request for solution

Lythande

posted Mar 26 '09 at 9:57 pm

[quote user="PEC"] At first I called this a serious bug. However, maybe I should

rephrase it and call it a serious flaw in the philosophy behind the

programming which gives rise to what is tantamount to a serious flaw in

the program whether that is strictly a bug or not doesn't matter much,

it's still the job of the programmers and designers (to my mind) to

watch out for and at least be aware of the implications and act

accordingly.[/quote]

I agree that it is a serious flaw in the philosopy of the programmers, and that flaw is to ignore standards and release sub-par software (Billy Boy, are you listening?) Personally, I salute David for following the standards so stringently. I could live with a warning message that the incoming mail breaks the rules, but not with David ignoring the standards to comply with crappy software--especially when doing so would open up security issues.

Lyth

[quote user="PEC"] At first I called this a serious bug.&nbsp; However, maybe I should rephrase it and call it a serious flaw in the philosophy behind the programming which gives rise to what is tantamount to a serious flaw in the program whether that is strictly a bug or not doesn't matter much, it's still the job of the programmers and designers (to my mind) to watch out for and at least be aware of the implications and act accordingly.[/quote]&nbsp;I agree that it is a serious flaw in the philosopy of the programmers, and that flaw is to ignore standards and release sub-par software (Billy Boy, are you listening?)&nbsp; Personally, I salute David for following the standards so stringently.&nbsp; I could live with a warning message that the incoming mail breaks the rules, but not with David ignoring the standards to comply with crappy software--especially when doing so would open up security issues.&nbsp;Lyth&nbsp;

PEC

posted Mar 13 '09 at 11:23 am

This is not a common problem but when it happens it is can be serious and far reaching as well as hard to detect. I would appreciate knowing if I can solve it myself and having it examined by the developer/s. Here is a description of the bug:

In the normal view text gets cut off, it just never appears. To verify this I look at the 'raw view' and each time the fuller text is there.

There doesn't seem to be any reason that I can identify that might explain this. There are no odd characters in the raw view and nothing else to suspect might be the trigger for truncating the text.

If this cannot be detected I am willing to send a copy of the latest example.

In fact this most recent example came to my attention as a result of a contact telling me he had already told me something that I was unaware of. I nearly argued with him but then remembered this flaw (bug) and double checked his original email and sure enough, in the raw view I read the extra, missing, text. Imagine if I had chosen to argue instead!

PEC

This is not a common problem but when it happens it is can be serious and far reaching as well as hard to detect.&nbsp; I would appreciate knowing if I can solve it myself and having it examined by the developer/s.&nbsp; Here is a description of the bug:&nbsp;In the normal view text gets cut off, it just never appears.&nbsp; To verify this I look at the 'raw view' and each time the fuller text is there.There doesn't seem to be any reason that I can identify that might explain this. There are no odd characters in the raw view and nothing else to suspect might be the trigger for truncating the text.If this cannot be detected I am willing to send a copy of the latest example.&nbsp;In fact this most recent example came to my attention as a result of a contact telling me he had already told me something that I was unaware of.&nbsp; I nearly argued with him but then remembered this flaw (bug) and double checked his original email and sure enough, in the raw view I read the extra, missing, text. Imagine if I had chosen to argue instead!PEC

PEC

posted Mar 13 '09 at 11:32 am

Addendum...

Whoops! Should mention I'm using Pegasus 4.41 for Windows 32bit.

It seems that it is longer paragraphs that get cut off and mid word too. Has someone set a very low string length somewhere and not tested it for other than short paragraphs?

Addendum...Whoops!&nbsp; Should mention I'm using Pegasus 4.41 for Windows 32bit.It seems that it is longer paragraphs that get cut off and mid word too.&nbsp; Has someone set a very low string length somewhere and not tested it for other than short paragraphs?

Thomas R. Stephenson

posted Mar 13 '09 at 5:11 pm

[quote user="PEC"]This is not a common problem but when it happens it is can be serious and far reaching as well as hard to detect. I would appreciate knowing if I can solve it myself and having it examined by the developer/s. Here is a description of the bug:
In the normal view text gets cut off, it just never appears. To verify this I look at the 'raw view' and each time the fuller text is there.

I'll be willing to bet the problem lines are longer that 1000 characters. The RFC 2821says that each line of a SMTP mail message MUST be longer than 998 characters plus C/R and L/F. The originator's email client is writing entire paragraphs as a single line. Once they get to 1000 characters they will be truncated. Actually a SMTP mail system should reject these messages with a "Line too long" error but most do not.

There doesn't seem to be any reason that I can identify that might explain this. There are no odd characters in the raw view and nothing else to suspect might be the trigger for truncating the text.
If this cannot be detected I am willing to send a copy of the latest example.

Send the copy of the CNM file zipped as an attachment to techsupp@tstephenson.com

In fact this most recent example came to my attention as a result of a contact telling me he had already told me something that I was unaware of. I nearly argued with him but then remembered this flaw (bug) and double checked his original email and sure enough, in the raw view I read the extra, missing, text. Imagine if I had chosen to argue instead!
PEC[/quote]

<blockquote>[quote user="PEC"]This is not a common problem but when it happens it is can be serious and far reaching as well as hard to detect.&nbsp; I would appreciate knowing if I can solve it myself and having it examined by the developer/s.&nbsp; Here is a description of the bug:&nbsp;In the normal view text gets cut off, it just never appears.&nbsp; To verify this I look at the 'raw view' and each time the fuller text is there.</blockquote>I'll be willing to bet the problem lines are longer that 1000 characters.&nbsp; The RFC 2821says that each line of a SMTP mail message MUST be longer than 998 characters plus C/R and L/F. &nbsp; The originator's email client is writing entire paragraphs as a single line. Once they get to 1000 characters they will be truncated.&nbsp; Actually a SMTP mail system should reject these messages with a "Line too long" error but most do not. <blockquote>There doesn't seem to be any reason that I can identify that might explain this. There are no odd characters in the raw view and nothing else to suspect might be the trigger for truncating the text.If this cannot be detected I am willing to send a copy of the latest example.</blockquote>Send the copy of the CNM file zipped as an attachment to techsupp@tstephenson.com <blockquote>&nbsp;In fact this most recent example came to my attention as a result of a contact telling me he had already told me something that I was unaware of.&nbsp; I nearly argued with him but then remembered this flaw (bug) and double checked his original email and sure enough, in the raw view I read the extra, missing, text. Imagine if I had chosen to argue instead!PEC[/quote]</blockquote>

dkocmoud

posted Mar 13 '09 at 5:52 pm

Just to make sure we're not missing the obvious, does pressing F5 (Reformat Long Lines) or Ctrl-F5 (Wrap Long Lines) have any effect while reading that message?

Just to make sure we're not missing the obvious, does pressing F5 (Reformat Long Lines)&nbsp;or Ctrl-F5 (Wrap Long Lines) have any effect while reading that message? &nbsp;

PEC

posted Mar 13 '09 at 5:52 pm

Thanks for the very prompt response.

Where it says "MUST be" I will assume you mean "MUST NOT be".

I checked the number of characters with this latest example and it's 1009. If I do the same check with the raw view text then it is 1023.

0 to 1023 is 1024 bytes.

256, 512, 1024 comes to mind when I see that.

I will zip up the example today or tomorrow and send it as requested.

BUT, I have to say, even if the RFC is as you say, the raw view shows the full text so shouldn't we expect to see it also in the normal message view (surely?).

Paul E. Coughlin

&nbsp;Thanks for the very prompt response. Where it says "MUST be" I will assume you mean "MUST NOT be".&nbsp;I checked the number of characters with this latest example and it's 1009. If I do the same check with the raw view text then it is 1023. 0 to 1023 is 1024 bytes.256, 512, 1024 comes to mind when I see that.I will zip up the example today or tomorrow and send it as requested.BUT, I have to say, even if the RFC is as you say, the raw view shows the full text so shouldn't we expect to see it also in the normal message view (surely?).Paul E. Coughlin &nbsp;

PEC

posted Mar 13 '09 at 5:55 pm

Just tried and no it doesn't.

F5 has this effect:

The short lines become a few long ones but the missing text is still missing.

PEC

Just tried and no it doesn't.&nbsp;F5 has this effect: The short lines become a few long ones but the missing text is still missing.&nbsp;PEC

dkocmoud

posted Mar 13 '09 at 6:11 pm

The raw view is the exact message how it came across the wire and is stored on the computer, which is why you can see it there. However, when Pegasus Mail views the message it has to do some decoding work before it can display it in a presentable form. In doing so, it makes some assumptions on the largest line size based on RFC 2821 saying that a line MUST NOT be longer than 1000 characters, including the CR/LF characters. This is required because WinPmail reads a whole line of raw text into a memory buffer, which has to have a finite size (otherwise you suffer a buffer overflow and potential security vulnerability issue).

The problem here is that there are programmers of email systems out there that simply CANNOT READ. [:@] Because of them, we cannot be sure of anything, even though RFC 2821 exists, saying that email systems will never spit out a line longer than 1000 characters (including CR/LF). So some idiot programmer breaks the "rules" and other email systems get the blame for it.

I would strongly encourage you to respond back to your correspondent to tell them that their email client or email system is broken and that they should demand a fix immediately to abide by RFC2821 concerning the max length of a line of text in an SMTP email message.

The raw view is the exact message how it came across the wire and is stored on the computer, which is why you can see it there.&nbsp; However, when Pegasus Mail views the message it has to do some decoding work before it can display it in a presentable form.&nbsp; In doing so, it makes some assumptions on the largest line size based on RFC 2821 saying that a line MUST NOT be longer than 1000 characters, including the CR/LF characters.&nbsp; This is required because WinPmail reads a whole line of raw text into a memory buffer, which has to have a finite size (otherwise you suffer a buffer overflow and potential security vulnerability issue). The problem here is that there are programmers of email systems out there that simply CANNOT READ.&nbsp; [:@]&nbsp; Because of them, we cannot be sure of anything, even though RFC 2821 exists, saying that email systems will never spit out a line longer than 1000 characters (including CR/LF).&nbsp; So some idiot programmer breaks the "rules" and other email systems get the blame for it. I would strongly encourage you to respond back to your correspondent to tell them that their email client or email system is broken and that they should demand a fix immediately to abide by RFC2821 concerning the max length of a line of text in an SMTP email message.

arnaudherve

posted Mar 14 '09 at 3:03 am

Did I read incorrectly, or did you suggest we tell our correspondents to adapt to our Pmail?

Thomas R. Stephenson

posted Mar 14 '09 at 6:09 am

Did I read incorrectly, or did you suggest we tell our correspondents to adapt to our Pmail?

Nope, what you read was you should tell the correspondents that they should use email clients that comply with the MUST requirements of the RFC. Para 4.5.3.1 Size limits and minimums of RFC 2821 says

   There are several objects that have required minimum/maximum sizes.
   Every implementation MUST be able to receive objects of at least
   these sizes.

text line
      The maximum total length of a text line including the <CRLF> is
      1000 characters (not counting the leading dot duplicated for
      transparency).  This number may be increased by the use of SMTP
      Service Extensions.

<blockquote>Did I read incorrectly, or did you suggest we tell our correspondents to adapt to our Pmail? </blockquote>Nope, what you read was you should tell the correspondents that they should use email clients that comply with the MUST requirements of the RFC.&nbsp; Para 4.5.3.1 Size limits and minimums of RFC 2821 says <pre> There are several objects that have required minimum/maximum sizes. Every implementation MUST be able to receive objects of at least these sizes. </pre>&nbsp;<pre>text line The maximum total length of a text line including the &lt;CRLF&gt; is 1000 characters (not counting the leading dot duplicated for transparency). This number may be increased by the use of SMTP Service Extensions. </pre><blockquote>&nbsp;</blockquote>

arnaudherve

posted Mar 14 '09 at 6:29 am

PEC, can you read the Raw View and tell us what the mail software of your correspondent is? You should find it after "X-Mailer".

Or if you don't find it, copy/paste the header here if you can. Be careful to remove anything that could be illegal to publish before (confidential).

[quote user="PEC"]BUT, I have to say, even if the RFC is as you say, the raw view shows

the full text so shouldn't we expect to see it also in the normal

message view (surely?).[/quote]

I would find it extremely difficult to argue with you on that point. In other words, you seem more than perfectly right.

[quote user="Thomas R. Stephenson"]Nope, what you read was you should tell the correspondents that they

should use email clients that comply with the MUST requirements of the

RFC.[/quote]

I would humbly suggest that Pmail MUST read the text that is already in Raw View, and that the receiver SHOULD be very cautious before disturbing the sender about a mail compatibility issue ^^

PEC, can you also try the same account with Thunderbird and see what happens?

PEC, can you read the Raw View and tell us what the mail software of your correspondent is? You should find it after "X-Mailer". &nbsp;Or if you don't find it, copy/paste the header here if you can. Be careful to remove anything that could be illegal to publish before (confidential).&nbsp;[quote user="PEC"]BUT, I have to say, even if the RFC is as you say, the raw view shows the full text so shouldn't we expect to see it also in the normal message view (surely?).[/quote]&nbsp;I would find it extremely difficult to argue with you on that point. In other words, you seem more than perfectly right. &nbsp;[quote user="Thomas R. Stephenson"]Nope, what you read was you should tell the correspondents that they should use email clients that comply with the MUST requirements of the RFC.[/quote]&nbsp;I would humbly suggest that Pmail MUST read the text that is already in Raw View, and that the receiver SHOULD be very cautious before disturbing the sender about a mail compatibility issue ^^ &nbsp;PEC, can you also try the same account with Thunderbird and see what happens?

Phil

posted Mar 14 '09 at 11:17 am

[quote user="arnaudherve"]

I would humbly suggest that Pmail MUST read the text that is already in Raw View, and that the receiver SHOULD be very cautious before disturbing the sender about a mail compatibility issue ^^

[/quote]

~~Martin Ireland~~ David Kocmoud (sorry David) wrote : "This is required because WinPmail reads a whole line of raw text into a

memory buffer, which has to have a finite size (otherwise you suffer a

buffer overflow and potential security vulnerability issue)."

Do you understand what it means?

To display a raw view Pegasus Mail has almost nothing to do than to display what it reads in the original file, to display a presentable form, Pegasus Mail has to do some decoding, to do it it has to load the line into a memory buffer prior to launch the decoding process, that memory buffer has a limited size, as the RFC says that a line can't be longer than 1000 car, Pegasus Mail has a buffer whom size is 1000 car, it could be 1100 car but in that case you would ask why Pegasus Mail can't display a 1110 car line.

Example taken from a mail I received:

In raw view:

Ca c'est aussi ing=E9rable, les postes mobiles voire m=EAme les changements de prise r=E9seau entraineront des blocages permanents, je vais passer ma vie =E0 d=E9bloquer des ports.

In display mode:

Ca c'est aussi ingérable, les postes mobiles voire même les changements de prise réseau entraineront des blocages permanents, je vais passer ma vie à débloquer des ports.

You can see the difference and then imagine that Pegasus Mail has some decoding work to process to display a message in a presentable form.

David Harris, Thomas Stephenson, Martin Ireland and many others are very skillful in programming, you should trust them. As I told you in another post some skills in computing are not useless...

[quote user="arnaudherve"]&nbsp;I would humbly suggest that Pmail MUST read the text that is already in Raw View, and that the receiver SHOULD be very cautious before disturbing the sender about a mail compatibility issue ^^ [/quote]<strike>Martin Ireland</strike> David Kocmoud (sorry David) wrote : "This is required because WinPmail reads a whole line of raw text into a memory buffer, which has to have a finite size (otherwise you suffer a buffer overflow and potential security vulnerability issue)."Do you understand what it means? To display a raw view Pegasus Mail has almost nothing to do than to display what it reads in the original file, to display a presentable form, Pegasus Mail has to do some decoding, to do it it has to load the line into a memory buffer prior to launch the decoding process, that memory buffer has a limited size, as the RFC says that a line can't be longer than 1000 car, Pegasus Mail has a buffer whom size is 1000 car, it could be 1100 car but in that case you would ask why Pegasus Mail can't display a 1110 car line. Example taken from a mail I received:In raw view:Ca c'est aussi ing=E9rable, les postes mobiles voire m=EAme les changements&nbsp; de prise r=E9seau entraineront des blocages permanents, je vais passer ma vie =E0 d=E9bloquer des ports.In display mode:Ca c'est aussi ingérable, les postes mobiles voire même les changements de prise réseau entraineront des blocages permanents, je vais passer ma vie à débloquer des ports. You can see the difference and then imagine that Pegasus Mail has some decoding work to process to display a message in a presentable form. &nbsp;David Harris, Thomas Stephenson, Martin Ireland and many others are very skillful in programming, you should trust them. As I told you in another post some skills in computing are not useless...

arnaudherve

posted Mar 14 '09 at 12:02 pm

I think I understand. You give an example about the display of accented characters, which is ok but a bit off-topic. We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.

With my poor skills, I also understand that messages violating protocols like RFC 2821 are often detected at the level of servers and produce an error message. I would be surprised if the sender had been totally unaware of that bug.

I think I understand. You give an example about the display of accented characters, which is ok but a bit off-topic. We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.&nbsp;With my poor skills, I also understand that messages violating&nbsp; protocols like RFC 2821 are often detected at the level of servers and produce an error message. I would be surprised if the sender had been totally unaware of that bug.

Phil

posted Mar 14 '09 at 1:01 pm

[quote user="arnaudherve"]

I think I understand. You give an example about the display of accented characters, which is ok but a bit off-topic. We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.

[/quote]

No you don't understand. We are discussing about the non displaying of a line because of its length, the display of accented characters is just an example to show you that there is a difference between displaying the raw view and displaying the definitive text, you said that if Pegasus can display the line in raw view it can do it in the display view and the answer is no because there is a process difference between the 2.

[quote user="arnaudherve"]

With my poor skills, I also understand that messages violating protocols like RFC 2821 are often detected at the level of servers and produce an error message. I would be surprised if the sender had been totally unaware of that bug.

[/quote]

The sender is probably totally unaware of the problem and probably unaware also that rfc exist and what they are for, he bought or simply downloaded a software and the only thing he wants is that the software works just like it should.

[quote user="arnaudherve"]I think I understand. You give an example about the display of accented characters, which is ok but a bit off-topic. We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.[/quote]No you don't understand. We are discussing about the non displaying of a line because of its length, the display of accented characters is just an example to show you that there is a difference between displaying the raw view and displaying the definitive text, you said that if Pegasus can display the line in raw view it can do it in the display view and the answer is no because there is a process difference between the 2. [quote user="arnaudherve"]With my poor skills, I also understand that messages violating&nbsp; protocols like RFC 2821 are often detected at the level of servers and produce an error message. I would be surprised if the sender had been totally unaware of that bug. [/quote]The sender is probably totally unaware of the problem and probably unaware also that rfc exist and what they are for, he bought or simply downloaded a software and the only thing he wants is that the software works just like it should.

arnaudherve

posted Mar 14 '09 at 1:16 pm

[quote user="Phil"][quote user="arnaudherve"]

I think I understand. (...) We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.

[/quote]

No you don't understand. We are discussing about the non displaying of a line because of its length (...)

[/quote]

You are right on everything. Let us concentrate on helping the thread starter now.

[quote user="Phil"][quote user="arnaudherve"]I think I understand. (...) We are discussing in this thread the loss of display of entire paragraphs due to line length.[/quote]No you don't understand. We are discussing about the non displaying of a line because of its length (...) [/quote]&nbsp;You are right on everything. Let us concentrate on helping the thread starter now.

PEC

posted Mar 14 '09 at 3:42 pm

To: David, Arnaud, Thomas and Phil,

I have read each contribution with care and want to thank you all for your responses.

Below I am pasting in the raw and the normal view with a few edits. I first had this problem occur a couple of years ago but there was no support system in place at that time so I just upgraded and hoped for the best. Now, this time it has happened, I was able to find out what the problem is - just as explained by yourselves, I am sure.

I have also done a few tests but I would need to use a faulty sending email, (such as, it seems, the AOL web mail system). But, as a user, I am not interested in the cause if I cannot overcome it.

What I AM interested in is reading emails that I can rely on to be faithful to the original OR I get a warning message telling me something is wrong. For that reason I have just switched (after about twelve years of PMail use) to Thunderbird. But I am sad to leave. I very much believe, as a philosophy, in the "small" programmer - I am one myself as it happens.

From a programming point of view - rather than as just the user - I can see what the problem is (thanks to you all).

Now, some of you won't like this at all so let me add this is my own personal view - there is no law or moral dictate that I can reach out to as support (maybe there should be though) - the fact that Pmail is strictly going about it's business isn't good enough, it should be catering for all the bad email senders as part of it's own agenda, policy or philosophy. I emphasize, that is my personal view.

What that means, here, is that it isn't good enough for Pmail to simply ignore long lines and offer up excuses about buffer sizes and the like (sorry, I said you wouldn't like it).

So what SHOULD Pmail be doing (and have done already anyway)?

ASSUME that there will be non compliant messages received and, I believe the term is "gracefully" (no religion involved) deal with it regardless of compliance.

And what does that mean?

Well, if I were coding for this in VB (not net) then first off string sizes don't matter much so I would have to test for the end of the line by looking for what always comes next then I know that however long the line is, I have reached the end, not by relying of dubious quality input (people are well known for not sticking to the rules) but by positively testing for it.

At first I called this a serious bug. However, maybe I should rephrase it and call it a serious flaw in the philosophy behind the programming which gives rise to what is tantamount to a serious flaw in the program whether that is strictly a bug or not doesn't matter much, it's still the job of the programmers and designers (to my mind) to watch out for and at least be aware of the implications and act accordingly.

The implications, for me, are that I have had emails where important information has been completely missed due to this one flaw on it's own and I have only found out by accident.

I realise I have now seriously ruffled many feathers. So I will, gracefully, stop there and reitterate my thanks to each of you (regardless whether I appear to have criticised or confirmed your statements - each has been appreciated very much).

I look forward to reading the forthcoming furore...

Here now is the promised paste job...

Received: (qmail 20121 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO p3presmtp01-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) ([208.189.88.159])
 (envelope-sender <{Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com>)
 by smtp17-02.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (qmail-1.03) with SMTP
 for <pec@sanethinking.com>; 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000
Received: (qmail 22556 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000
Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.36])
 (envelope-sender <{Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com>)
 by p3presmtp01-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP
 for <pec@sanethinking.com>; 10 Mar 2009 14:51:12 -0000
Received: from {Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com
 by imo-d04.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v39.1.) id z.cc8.432703ac (34899)
 for <pec@sanethinking.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com (smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com [64.12.207.150]) by cia-da01.mx.aol.com (v123.3) with ESMTP id MAILCIADA018-5c7849b67e4c25c; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:59 -0400
Received: from webmail-de07 (webmail-de07.webmail.aol.com [205.188.104.28]) by smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com (v121_r5.5) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMB037-5c7849b67e4c25c; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:52 -0400
References: <49B10731.18706.516F34@pec.SaneThinking.com>, <8CB6DDF3EFD771B-1140-7AD@webmail-da15.sysops.aol.com> <49B672A8.14154.BBBEC8@pec.SaneThinking.com>
To: pec@SaneThinking.com
Subject: Re: Your letter in MEN
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:51 -0400
X-AOL-IP: 92.237.43.114
In-Reply-To: <49B672A8.14154.BBBEC8@pec.SaneThinking.com>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: {Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="--------MB_8CB6FA6BE0A04CE_91C_132_webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 41757-STANDARD
Received: from 92.237.43.114 by webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com (205.188.104.28) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:51 -0400
Message-Id: <8CB6FA6BD9793BE-91C-A1@webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com>
X-Spam-Flag:NO
X-Nonspam: Statistical 65%
X-PMFLAGS: 570950016 0 1 P4HF0DQQ.CNM

----------MB_8CB6FA6BE0A04CE_91C_132_webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Paul
Thanks for the reply and the advice. You're right I didn't have the site when I wrote to the MEN which was a mistake I should have waited until I'd sorted the site before I wrote the letters. I actually wrote to every local and national newspaper in the country but on the MEN, BEN and a couple of the freebies actually printed it. I've written to the BBC gardeners World magazine, The national Trust, The RHA and ITV and to every local authority allotments officer in the country. Although I'm getting the 'it's a great idea' returns, I'm not getting much by way of practical support. Your suggestions of links to other sites is good but my knowledge and understanding of the net is quite limited. I've started a face book group but again I don't really know how to promote it there either. I can run the scheme and the legal stuff with my eyes closed but getting the support and the name out there is proving more difficult than I imagined. I'd certainly appreciate any practical help you can gi
ve in that direction. I take on board your comments about forums and guest books and I don't want to get tied down with inane chatter or to be constantly erasing viagra adverts so it might be best if I turn them off altogether.

As I said thanks for the advice and any practical help would be greatly appreciated. I have applied for some lottery funding and a few other grants but they take months for the applications to be sorted but if I get some funding I'll certainly be spending it on the web site. You mentioned about changing the host, can you recommend someone?

Cheers

{Privacy Edit - pec}

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below is the "message" view; (above is the "Raw view")
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Paul

Thanks for the reply and the advice. You're right I didn't have the site
when I wrote to the MEN which was a mistake I should have waited until I'd
sorted the site before I wrote the letters. I actually wrote to every
local and national newspaper in the country but on the MEN, BEN and a
couple of the freebies actually printed it. I've written to the BBC
gardeners World magazine, The national Trust, The RHA and ITV and to every
local authority allotments officer in the country. Although I'm getting
the 'it's a great idea' returns, I'm not getting much by way of practical
support. Your suggestions of links to other sites is good but my knowledge
and understanding of the net is quite limited. I've started a face book
group but again I don't really know how to promote it there either. I can
run the scheme and the legal stuff with my eyes closed but getting the
support and the name out there is proving more difficult than I imagined.
I'd certainly appreciate any practical help you can give in that
direction. I ta

As I said thanks for the advice and any practical help would be greatly
appreciated. I have applied for some lottery funding and a few other
grants but they take months for the applications to be sorted but if I get
some funding I'll certainly be spending it on the web site. You mentioned
about changing the host, can you recommend someone?

Cheers

{Privacy Edit - pec}

To: David, Arnaud, Thomas and Phil,I have read each contribution with care and want to thank you all for your responses.Below I am pasting in the raw and the normal view with a few edits. I first had this problem occur a couple of years ago but there was no support system in place at that time so I just upgraded and hoped for the best.&nbsp; Now, this time it has happened, I was able to find out what the problem is - just as explained by yourselves, I am sure.&nbsp; I have also done a few tests but I would need to use a faulty sending email, (such as, it seems, the AOL web mail system). But, as a user, I am not interested in the cause if I cannot overcome it.&nbsp; What I AM interested in is reading emails that I can rely on to be faithful to the original OR I get a warning message telling me something is wrong.&nbsp; For that reason I have just switched (after about twelve years of PMail use) to Thunderbird.&nbsp; But I am sad to leave. I very much believe, as a philosophy, in the "small" programmer - I am one myself as it happens.From a programming point of view - rather than as just the user - I can see what the problem is (thanks to you all).&nbsp; Now, some of you won't like this at all so let me add this is my own personal view - there is no law or moral dictate that I can reach out to as support (maybe there should be though) - the fact that Pmail is strictly going about it's business isn't good enough, it should be catering for all the bad email senders as part of it's own agenda, policy or philosophy.&nbsp; I emphasize, that is my personal view. &nbsp;What that means, here, is that it isn't good enough for Pmail to simply ignore long lines and offer up excuses about buffer sizes and the like (sorry, I said you wouldn't like it).So what SHOULD Pmail be doing (and have done already anyway)? &nbsp;ASSUME that there will be non compliant messages received and, I believe the term is "gracefully" (no religion involved) deal with it regardless of compliance.And what does that mean?&nbsp;Well, if I were coding for this in VB (not net) then first off string sizes don't matter much so I would have to test for the end of the line by looking for what always comes next then I know that however long the line is, I have reached the end, not by relying of dubious quality input (people are well known for not sticking to the rules) but by positively testing for it.&nbsp;At first I called this a serious bug.&nbsp; However, maybe I should rephrase it and call it a serious flaw in the philosophy behind the programming which gives rise to what is tantamount to a serious flaw in the program whether that is strictly a bug or not doesn't matter much, it's still the job of the programmers and designers (to my mind) to watch out for and at least be aware of the implications and act accordingly. &nbsp;The implications, for me,&nbsp; are that I have had emails where important information has been completely missed due to this one flaw on it's own and I have only found out by accident.&nbsp;I realise I have now seriously ruffled many feathers. So I will, gracefully, stop there and reitterate my thanks to each of you (regardless whether I appear to have criticised or confirmed your statements - each has been appreciated very much). &nbsp;I look forward to reading the forthcoming furore...Here now is the promised paste job...Received: (qmail 20121 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO p3presmtp01-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net) ([208.189.88.159]) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (envelope-sender &lt;{Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com&gt;) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; by smtp17-02.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (qmail-1.03) with SMTP &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; for &lt;pec@sanethinking.com&gt;; 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 22556 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2009 14:51:17 -0000 Received: from imo-d04.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.36]) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; (envelope-sender &lt;{Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com&gt;) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; by p3presmtp01-10.prod.phx3.secureserver.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; for &lt;pec@sanethinking.com&gt;; 10 Mar 2009 14:51:12 -0000 Received: from {Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; by imo-d04.mx.aol.com&nbsp; (mail_out_v39.1.) id z.cc8.432703ac (34899) &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;for &lt;pec@sanethinking.com&gt;; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com (smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com [64.12.207.150]) by cia-da01.mx.aol.com (v123.3) with ESMTP id MAILCIADA018-5c7849b67e4c25c; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:59 -0400 Received: from webmail-de07 (webmail-de07.webmail.aol.com [205.188.104.28]) by smtprly-mb03.mx.aol.com (v121_r5.5) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYMB037-5c7849b67e4c25c; Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:52 -0400 References: &lt;49B10731.18706.516F34@pec.SaneThinking.com&gt;, &lt;8CB6DDF3EFD771B-1140-7AD@webmail-da15.sysops.aol.com&gt; &lt;49B672A8.14154.BBBEC8@pec.SaneThinking.com&gt; To: pec@SaneThinking.com Subject: Re: Your letter in MEN Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:51 -0400 X-AOL-IP: 92.237.43.114 In-Reply-To: &lt;49B672A8.14154.BBBEC8@pec.SaneThinking.com&gt; X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: {Privacy Edit - pec}@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; &nbsp;boundary="--------MB_8CB6FA6BE0A04CE_91C_132_webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 41757-STANDARD Received: from 92.237.43.114 by webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com (205.188.104.28) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 10 Mar 2009 10:50:51 -0400 Message-Id: &lt;8CB6FA6BD9793BE-91C-A1@webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com&gt; X-Spam-Flag:NO X-Nonspam: Statistical 65% X-PMFLAGS: 570950016 0 1 P4HF0DQQ.CNM&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ----------MB_8CB6FA6BE0A04CE_91C_132_webmail-de07.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi Paul Thanks for the reply and the advice. You're right I didn't have the site when I wrote to the MEN which was a mistake I should have waited until I'd sorted the site before I wrote the letters. I actually wrote to every local and national newspaper in the country but on the MEN, BEN and a couple of the freebies actually printed it. I've written to the BBC gardeners World magazine, The national Trust, The RHA and ITV and to every local authority allotments officer in the country. Although I'm getting the 'it's a great idea' returns, I'm not getting much by way of practical support. Your suggestions of links to other sites is good but my knowledge and understanding of the net is quite limited. I've started a face book group but again I don't really know how to promote it there either. I can run the scheme and the legal stuff with my eyes closed but getting the support and the name out there is proving more difficult than I imagined. I'd certainly appreciate any practical help you can gi ve in that direction. I take on board your comments about forums and guest books and I don't want to get tied down with inane chatter or to be constantly erasing viagra adverts so it might be best if I turn them off altogether. As I said thanks for the advice and any practical help would be greatly appreciated. I have applied for some lottery funding and a few other grants but they take months for the applications to be sorted but if I get some funding I'll certainly be spending it on the web site. You mentioned about changing the host, can you recommend someone? Cheers {Privacy Edit - pec} ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Below is the "message" view; (above is the "Raw view") ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Paul Thanks for the reply and the advice. You're right I didn't have the site when I wrote to the MEN which was a mistake I should have waited until I'd sorted the site before I wrote the letters. I actually wrote to every local and national newspaper in the country but on the MEN, BEN and a couple of the freebies actually printed it. I've written to the BBC gardeners World magazine, The national Trust, The RHA and ITV and to every local authority allotments officer in the country. Although I'm getting the 'it's a great idea' returns, I'm not getting much by way of practical support. Your suggestions of links to other sites is good but my knowledge and understanding of the net is quite limited. I've started a face book group but again I don't really know how to promote it there either. I can run the scheme and the legal stuff with my eyes closed but getting the support and the name out there is proving more difficult than I imagined. I'd certainly appreciate any practical help you can give in that direction. I ta As I said thanks for the advice and any practical help would be greatly appreciated. I have applied for some lottery funding and a few other grants but they take months for the applications to be sorted but if I get some funding I'll certainly be spending it on the web site. You mentioned about changing the host, can you recommend someone? Cheers {Privacy Edit - pec}

Sharkfin

posted Mar 17 '09 at 1:37 am

Firstly, I totally agree that not gracefully dealing with errors is problematic. I do wonder whether Pegasus could offer up some kind of warning that the message you have selected may have a line-length issue. Perhaps not finding a <CRLF> within the 1000 characters could trigger it?

Secondly, I see that the X-mailer header is AOL webmail. Effing AOL. Breaking the 'net since the year dot, I think, and therefore zero chance of getting them to sort out their aberrant software.

Finally, I think that you, PEC, have to take a bit of the blame for not noticing the bizarre end of line in the long paragraph. Did you not see the mid-word break and think "something's missing there"? However, as the missing bit in this example doesn't appear to be vital, as you suggested earlier, I have to assume that this is not the message which caused the major misunderstanding.

Honours even, I'd say. Everyone involved contributed to the problem!

Firstly, I totally agree that not gracefully dealing with errors is problematic. I do wonder whether Pegasus could offer up some kind of warning that the message you have selected may have a line-length issue. Perhaps not finding a &lt;CRLF&gt; within the 1000 characters could trigger it?Secondly, I see that the X-mailer header is AOL webmail. Effing AOL. Breaking the 'net since the year dot, I think, and therefore zero chance of getting them to sort out their aberrant software.Finally, I think that you, PEC, have to take a bit of the blame for not noticing the bizarre end of line in the long paragraph. Did you not see the mid-word break and think "something's missing there"? However, as the missing bit in this example doesn't appear to be vital, as you suggested earlier, I have to assume that this is not the message which caused the major misunderstanding.Honours even, I'd say. Everyone involved contributed to the problem!

arnaudherve

posted Mar 17 '09 at 4:45 am

Sorry to be the bad guy again, but in this forum it seems you have to chose between being a good guy and being common sense.

[quote user="Sharkfin"]

Finally, I think that you, PEC, have to take a bit of the blame for not noticing the bizarre end of line in the long paragraph. Did you not see the mid-word break and think "something's missing there"?[/quote]

I would never blame a user for not noticing a bug. I would even say that if we propose a mail client to download, the user is right to assume that it at least displays the text.

[quote user="Sharkfin"]However, as the missing bit in this example doesn't appear to be vital, as you suggested earlier, I have to assume that this is not the message which caused the major misunderstanding.

[/quote]

We don"t have to judge the importance of people's messages. Any letter not displayed is problematic.

Sorry to be the bad guy again, but in this forum it seems you have to chose between being a good guy and being common sense. [quote user="Sharkfin"]Finally, I think that you, PEC, have to take a bit of the blame for not noticing the bizarre end of line in the long paragraph. Did you not see the mid-word break and think "something's missing there"?[/quote]I would never blame a user for not noticing a bug. I would even say that if we propose a mail client to download, the user is right to assume that it at least displays the text. [quote user="Sharkfin"]However, as the missing bit in this example doesn't&nbsp;appear to be vital, as you suggested earlier, I have to assume that this is not the message which caused the major misunderstanding.[/quote]We don"t have to judge the importance of people's messages. Any letter not displayed is problematic.

tjunker

posted Mar 23 '09 at 6:39 am

This is quite an old problem. I first noticed it, also discovering it by accident, sometime in the evolution of Microsoft's email programs. I don't recall whether it appeared in the time of Microsoft Mail or Exchange, but it was one of several serious non-compliance issues Microsoft introduced.

In my experience it was never the case that my correspondent had "downloaded some software" and installed it. My correspondents were usually in medium to large corporations where the individual had no control whatsoever over the mail software in use. In such organizations a complaint that the Microsoft mail system in use was non-compliant with Internet RFCs would have gone nowhere.

While I find Microsoft's non-compliance with standards thoroughly abusive and distasteful, and there have been reports that Microsoft has often done this intentionally, the fact that the overwhelming majority of my correspondents use Microsoft email products makes this something that Pegasus cannot simply dismiss. If most of my inbound email comes from Microsoft email products, then most non-compliance issues in that email MUST be dealt with in a reasonable manner. Simply truncating overly-long lines with no warning is completely unacceptable.

This issue, while annoying, has not been a make/break one for me. I have a much more serious issue that is now causing me to have to consider abandoning Pegasus Mail for Windows -- corruption of my folder and tray hierarchy and disappearance of many messages in a system I have been using for more than ten years and which contains several hundreds of thousands of emails -- a de facto database of all my technical correspondence since 1997. I have posted in another thread about this.

&nbsp;This is quite an old problem.&nbsp; I first noticed it, also discovering it by accident, sometime in the evolution of Microsoft's email programs.&nbsp; I don't recall whether it appeared in the time of Microsoft Mail or Exchange, but it was one of several serious non-compliance issues Microsoft introduced.In my experience it was never the case that my correspondent had "downloaded some software" and installed it.&nbsp; My correspondents were usually in medium to large corporations where the individual had no control whatsoever over the mail software in use. In such organizations a complaint that the Microsoft mail system in use was non-compliant with Internet RFCs would have gone nowhere.While I find Microsoft's non-compliance with standards thoroughly abusive and distasteful, and there have been reports that Microsoft has often done this intentionally, the fact that the overwhelming majority of my correspondents use Microsoft email products makes this something that Pegasus cannot simply dismiss.&nbsp; If most of my inbound email comes from Microsoft email products, then most non-compliance issues in that email MUST be dealt with in a reasonable manner.&nbsp; Simply truncating overly-long lines with no warning is completely unacceptable.This issue, while annoying, has not been a make/break one for me. I have a much more serious issue that is now causing me to have to consider abandoning Pegasus Mail for Windows -- corruption of my folder and tray hierarchy and disappearance of many messages in a system I have been using for more than ten years and which contains several hundreds of thousands of emails -- a de facto database of all my technical correspondence since 1997.&nbsp; I have posted in another thread about this.

Related Topics

Pending draft

Confirm move posts

Insufficient permissions

Select a different topic

Edit history