https://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2295
--- Comment #5 from Guillaume Outters <guillaume-exim@???> ---
Created attachment 1096
-->
https://bugs.exim.org/attachment.cgi?id=1096&action=edit
full rewrite of pdkim_headcat
In addition to having this bug, pdkim_headcat seemed to have complexified over
time, so maybe it's time to make a (working!) rewrite of the function.
With it running on my server I created valid DKIM signatures:
- in my nominal case (the signature ending 1 character before the EOL, the
semicolon correctly gets the last place on the line)
- by shifting everything (introducing a space before the b=), thus having the
signature take the full last line, and the semicolon correctly appear on the
start of a new, padded line
So this corrects the "disappearing last char" problem, on the b= ending
semicolon.
Note that this applies only on the full signature, not on the one with an empty
b=; used to compute the signature: in both our cases (my exim server and
exim-dev's one), the bh= always gets on a new line, so b= always stars at
position 49, so there is no chance that the b=; gets split around the
semicolon:
h=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcde
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz;
bh=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789; b=;
For this to be tested, we could play with the h=, removing some headers to let
the bh= and the b= get a place without starting a new line:
h=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789abcde
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz012345; bh=abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789; b=
;
Now *this* would get interesting, because it would confirm (or dismiss) the
undeterministic "could insert a linebreak" comment.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
