I am trying to extract a message rom multi-part email body or from attachment, so I used :0B to try each option like the following:
msgID=""
#extract message in the attachment if it's plain text
:0B
* ^Content-Disposition: *attachment.*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*($)($)\/[a-z0-9+]+=*
{msgID="$MATCH"}
#extract message in the body if it's there
:0EB
* ^()\/[a-z]+[0-9]+[^\+]
{msgID = "$MATCH"}
But msgID got the same message from the body which was inline image code, what's wrong with it, who know the better condition to filter it?
I also need to detect if the sub-header in the body is text and base64 encoded, then decode it, how to stipulate it with regex:
:0B
* ^Content-Type:text/html;
* ^Content-Location:text_0.txt
* ^Content-Transfer-Encoding:base64
* ^Content-Disposition: *attachment.*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*($)($)\/[a-z0-9+]+=*
{ msgID= msgId =`printf '%s' "$MATCH" | base64 -d` }
It always complains no match: ^Content-Type:text/html;
I'm guessing you are trying to say, there are two types of incoming messages. One looks something like this:
From: Sender <there#example.net>
To: You <AmyX#example.com>
Subject: plain text
ohmigod0
And the other is a complex MIME multipart with the same contents:
From: Sender <there#example.net>
To: Amy X <AmyX#example.com>
Subject: MIME complexity
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary=12345
--12345
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: base64
Content-disposition: attachment; filename="text_0.txt"
Content-location: text_0.txt
b2htaWdvZDA=
--12345--
If this is correct, you would want to create a recipe to handle the more complex case first, because it has more features -- if your regex hits, it's unlikely to be a false positive. If not, fall back to the simpler pattern, and assume there will never be any false positives on this (perhaps because this account only receives email from a single system).
# extract message in the attachment if this is a MIME message
:0B
* ^Content-Disposition: *attachment.*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*($))($)\/[a-z0-9+]+=*
{ msgID="$MATCH" } # hafta have spaces inside the braces
:0EB # else, do this: assume the first non-empty body line is msgID
* ^()\/[a-z]+[0-9]+[^\+]
{ msgID="$MATCH" } # still need spaces inside braces;
# ... and, as pointed out many times before, cannot have spaces
# around the equals sign
The regular expression for the attachment is an oversimplification, but I already showed you how to cope with a complex MIME message in a previous question of yours -- if you have multiple cases (for example, base64-encoded attachment, or just a plain-text attachment, or no MIME), I would arrange them from more-complex (meaning more features in the regex) and fall back successively to simpler regexes, with higher chance of false positives. You can chain :0E ("else") cases for as long as you like -- if a regex succeeds and the following recipes are :0E recipes, they will all be skipped.
In response to your update, there are two problems with your attempt. The first, as you note, is that the first regex doesn't match. You have no space after the colon, and I'm guessing there is one in the message you are matching against. You need to understand that every character in a regex needs to match exactly, with the exception of regex metacharacters, which have special meaning. You would typically see something like this in many Procmail recipes:
* ^Content-Type:[ ]*text/html;
where the spaces between the square brackets are a space and a tab. The character class (the stuff in the square brackets) matches either character once, and the asterisk * says to repeat this pattern zero or more times. This allows for arbitrary spacing after the colon. The square brackets and the star are metacharacters. (This is very basic stuff which should be in any Procmail introduction you may have read.)
Your other problem is that each regex is applied in isolation. So your recipe says, if the Content-Type header appears anywhere in the body, and the Content-Location header appears anywhere else (typically, in another MIME header somewhere) etc. In other words, your recipe is very prone to false positives. This is why the rule I proposed earlier is so complex: It looks for these headers in sequence, in a single block, that is, in a single MIME header (though there is nothing to actually make sure that the context is a MIME body part header; more on that in a bit).
Because we want to ensure that there are four different headers, in any order, the regex for this is going to be huge: ABCD|ACDB|ACDB|ABDC|ADCB|BACD|... where A is the Content-Type header regex, B is the Content-Location regex, etc. You could cheat a little bit and craft a single regex which matches a sequence of four matches of the same header-identifying regex -- this is unlikely to cause any false positives (there is no sane reason to have two copies of the same header) and simplifies the code significantly, though it's still complex. Pay attention here: We want to create a single regex which matches any one out of these four headers.
^Content-(Type:[ ]text/plain;|\
Location:[ ]*text_0\.txt|\
Transfer-Encoding:[ ]*base64|\
Disposition:[ ]*attachment)
... followed by any header, repeated four times, followed by the MIME body part (which you had after the Content-Disposition header, slightly out of context, but not incorrectly per se).
(Your code has text/html but if the attachment isn't HTML, as suggested by the format and the filename, it should be text/plain; so I'm going with that instead.)
Before we go there, I'll point out that MIME parsing in Procmail is not done a lot, precisely because it tends to explode into enormously complex regular expressions. MIME has a lot of options, and you need each regex to allow for omission or inclusion of each optional element. There are options for how to encode things (base64, or quoted-printable, or not encoded at all) and options to include or omit quotes around many elements, and options to use a multipart message with one or more body parts or just put the data in the body, like in my constructed first example message (which is still technically a MIME message; its implied content type is text/plain; charset="us-ascii" and the default content transfer encoding is 7bit, which conveniently happens to be what email before MIME always had to look like).
So unless you are in this because (a) you really, really want to learn the deepest secrets of Procmail or (b) you are on a very constrained system where you have to because there is nothing else you can use, I would seriously suggest that you move to a language with a proper MIME parser. A Python script which decodes this would be just half a dozen lines or so, and you get everything normalized and decoded nicely for you with no need for you to reinvent quoted-printable decoding or character set translation. (You can still call the Python script from Procmail if you like.)
I'll also point out here that a proper MIME parser would extract the boundary= parameter from the top-level headers in a multipart message, and make sure any matching on body part headers only occurs immediately after a boundary separator. The following Procmail code does not do that, so we could get a false positive if a message contains a match somewhere else than in the MIME body part headers (such as, for example, if a bounce message contains a fragment of the MIME headers of the bounced message; in this case, you would like for the recipe not to match, but it will).
:0B
* ^(Content-(Type:[ ]text/plain;|\
Location:[ ]*text_0\.txt|\
Transfer-Encoding:[ ]*base64|\
Disposition:[ ]*attachment).*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*)($)\
(Content-(Type:[ ]text/plain;|\
Location:[ ]*text_0\.txt|\
Transfer-Encoding:[ ]*base64|\
Disposition:[ ]*attachment).*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*)($)\
(Content-(Type:[ ]text/plain;|\
Location:[ ]*text_0\.txt|\
Transfer-Encoding:[ ]*base64|\
Disposition:[ ]*attachment).*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*)($)\
(Content-(Type:[ ]text/plain;|\
Location:[ ]*text_0\.txt|\
Transfer-Encoding:[ ]*base64|\
Disposition:[ ]*attachment).*(($)[a-z0-9].*)*)($)\
($)\/[a-z0-9/+]+=*
{ msgid=`printf '%s' "$MATCH" | base64 -d` }
:0BE
* ^^\/[a-z]+[0-9]*[^\+]
{ msgid="$MATCH" }
(Unfortunately, Procmail's regex engine doesn't have the {4} repetition operator, so we have to repeat the regex literally four times!)
As noted before, Procmail, unfortunately, doesn't know anything about MIME. As far as Procmail is concerned, the top-level headers are headers, and everything else is body. There have been attempts to write MIME libraries or extensions for Procmail, but they don't tend to reduce complexity, just shuffle it around.
Related
For a couple of days, I've been trying to write procmail script.
I want to forward messages, and inject some text into message contents.
What I want to accomplish :
someone send me e-mail, with word "weather" in the subject
email is forwarded to address "mymail#somedomain.com"
every forwarded email gets some added text in contents
But so far, no success.
In .procmail.log, there's a message "procmail: Missing action"
SHELL=/bin/bash
VERBOSE=off
LOGFILE=/home/test/.procmail.log
LOGDATE_=`/bin/date +%Y-%m-%d`
:0
* ^Subject:.*weather
:0 bfw
| echo "This is injected text" ; echo "" ; cat
:0 c
! mymail#somedomain.com
When I looked into email source, I saw that text is injected.
But the place is wrong ...
Take a look:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="------------148F3F0AD3D65DD3F3498ACA"
Content-Language: pl
Status:
X-EsetId: 37303A29AA1D9F60667466
This is injected text
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------148F3F0AD3D65DD3F3498ACA
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
CONTENT CONTENT CONTENT
*********************************************************
Injected text should be placed, where content is. Now it is above ...
You don't explain your code, but it looks like that you are attempting to use multiple actions under a single condition. Use braces for that.
:0
* ^Subject:.*weather
{
:0 bfw
| echo "This is injected text" ; echo "" ; cat
:0 c
! mymail#somedomain.com
}
Just to summarize, every recipe must have a header line (the :0 and possible flags) and an action. The conditions are optional, and there can be more than one. A block of further recipes is one form of action so that satisfies these requirements (the other action types are saving to a folder, piping to a command, or forwarding to an email address).
To inject text at the top of the first MIME body part of a multipart message, you need to do some MIME parsing. Procmail unfortunately has no explicit support for MIME, but if you know that the incoming message will always have a particular structure, you might get away with something fairly simple.
:0
* ^Subject:.*weather
{
:0fbw
* ^Mime-version: 1\.0
* ^Content-type: multipart/
| awk '/^Content-type: text\/plain;/&&!s {n=s=1} \
n&&/^$/{n=0; p=1} \
1; \
p{ print "This is injected text.\n"; p=0 }'
:0 c
! mymail#somedomain.com
}
The body (which contains all the MIME body parts, with their headers and everything) is passed to a simple Awk script, which finds the first empty line after (what we optimistically assume is) the first text/plain MIME body part header, and injects the text there. (Awk is case-sensitive, so the regex text might need to be adapted or generalized, and I have assumed the whitespace in the input message is completely regular. For a production system, these simplifying assumptions are unrealistic.)
If you need full MIME support (for example, the input message may or may not be multipart, or contain nested multiparts), my recommendation would be to write the injection code in some modern script language with proper MIME support libraries; Python would be my pick, though it is still (even after the email library update in 3.6) is slightly cumbersome and clumsy.
I have to decode some base64 string using Perl, and I want to know the docode is success or not.
How can I know the decode is OK? What will happen if my decode is failed?
There is no "decode is failed" with MIME::Base64::decode_base64. It will simply ignore anything which does not fit, i.e. characters which are not valid base64 characters, incomplete padding at the end or any data following the end marker '='. Thus, it will always return something and in the worst case this will be an empty string.
Note that this behavior is not even wrong. At least some of the various Base64 standards explicitly require invalid characters to be skipped and none defines error handling in case of incomplete padding or data after '='. Still, the output of MIME::Base64 might be different compared to other implementations in case of invalid data.
When using MIME::Base64's decode_base64, the decode is always deemed to be successful. Disallowed characters are ignored.
You could strictly verify that you have a valid base64 using the following:
my $c1 = '[A-Za-z0-9+/]';
my $c2 = '[AQgw]';
my $c3 = '[AEIMQUYcgkosw048]';
die "Invalid data\n"
if $s !~ m{^(?:$c1{4})*+(?>$c1(?>$c2==|$c1$c3=)|)\z};
Whitespace is often used in the middle, so you might want to allow whitespace. (In fact, encode_base64 includes whitespace in its output by default!)
The = are often left out, so you might want to allow missing =.
If you're worried about data corruption, include a hash of the data with the data.
I am making an effort to understand sockets in lua. I am a bit stuck in client:send(data [, i [, j]]) as http://w3.impa.br/~diego/software/luasocket/tcp.html#send provides but I can't quite understand what it actually does and this manual doesn't explain much. For example, in order to send a file request, we use c:send("GET " .. file .. " HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n"). Why should we use "GET" at the start and "HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n" at the end? I've searched for other sites but none seem to be informative enough...
It is all explained in the HTTP 1.0 protocol specifications.
Read specially the request section of the specs:
The Request-Line begins with a method token, followed by the
Request-URI and the protocol version, and ending with CRLF. The
elements are separated by SP characters. No CR or LF are allowed
except in the final CRLF sequence.
Request-Line = Method SP Request-URI SP HTTP-Version CRLF
There are the following methods supported:
GET
POST
HEAD
SP is separator. CRLF is CR (carriage return) followed by LF (newline feed) characters. The constants are listed here.
So, in a request formed like below:
GET some/path/to/file.lua HTTP/1.0\r\n\r\n
You have:
Method = GET
URI = some/path/to/file.lua
HTTP version = HTTP/1.0
CR = \r
LF = \n
The characters \r and \n respectively represent CR and LF in several programming languages. The are actually the same characters as: string.char(13) and string.char(10) respectively.
Set out to write a simple procmail recipie that would forward the mail to me if it found the text "Unprovisioned" in the subject.
:0:
* ^Subject:.*Unprovisioned.*
! me#test.com
Unfortunately the subject field in the mail message coming from the mail server was in MIME encoded-word syntax.
The form is: "=?charset?encoding?encoded text?=".
Subject: =?UTF-8?B?QURWSVNPUlk6IEJNRFMgMTg0NSwgTkVXIFlPUksgLSBVbnByb3Zpc2lvbmVkIENvbm4gQQ==?=
=?UTF-8?B?bGVydA==?=
The above subject is utf-8 charset, base64 encoding with text folded to two lines. So was wondering if there are any mechanisms/scripts/utilities to parse this and convert to string format so that I could apply my procmail filter. Ofcourse I can write a perl script to parse this an perform the required validations, but looking to avoid it if possible.
Encode::MIME::Header, which ships with Perl, accessed directly through Encode:
use Encode qw(encode decode);
my $header_text = decode('MIME-Header', $header);
I use MIME::Entity module in Perl to create a MIME message. Some of the headers seem to be encoded OK, while other seem to have issues with folding.
Code:
use strict;
use Encode;
use MIME::Entity;
my %build_params = (
'Charset' => 'UTF-8',
'From' => encode('MIME-Header', 'Fantasy Email <vujerldujhgurtelhwgutrwhgunwlhvulhgvnuwlhvuwlnhvgnulwh#gmail.com>'),
'Subject' => encode('MIME-Header', "A very long subject that will span on multiple lines in the headers, with a leading sp\
ace at the beginning of each new line."),
'Type' => 'multipart/alternative',
);
my $top = MIME::Entity->build(%build_params);
$top->print_header();
Output:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----------=_1312196104-11708-0";
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.427 (Entity 5.427)
Subject: A very long subject that will span on multiple lines in the
headers, with a leading space at the beginning of each new line.
From: Fantasy Email
<vujerldujhgurtelhwgutrwhgunwlhvulhgvnuwlhvuwlnhvgnulwh#gmail .com>
The Subject seems to be correctly split into multiple lines. The From doesn't, leaving a space before the com, but the newline is gone.
Is this standard behavior or have I found a bug in MIME::Entity?
Encode::MIME::Header (called as encode('MIME-Header', ...)) does some line splitting (called folding in the RFC 822).
Unfortunately, MIME::Entity does some line splitting too, probably in a different way. It also gets rid of the newline generated by Encode::MIME::Header. It leaves the spaces though.
I would be happy to leave MIME::Entity deal with the encoding of my headers, but it looks like it just does the line splitting part. So I guess I still have to encode them myself.
As a workaround, I removed the line splitting markers from my encoded headers with
my $encoded_from = encode('MIME-Header', 'Fantasy Email <vujerldujhgurtelhwgutrwhgunwlhvulhgvnuwlhvuwlnhvgnulwh#gmail.com>');
$encoded_from =~ s/\r?\n\s//g;
(And same thing for the subject.)
Now the output looks like this:
Subject: A very long subject that will span on multiple lines in the
headers, with a leading space at the beginning of each new line.
From: Fantasy Email
<vujerldujhgurtelhwgutrwhgunwlhvulhgvnuwlhvuwlnhvgnulwh#gmail.com>
I'm wondering if there's a more elegant solution, like Encode::MIME::Header featuring a MIME::Entity compatibility mode or something like that.