Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I read somewhere a while ago that one can configure external jabber components (XEP-0114) to send XMPP stanza's on behalf on any user. For instance say i have a component bind to (component.localhost) and i want it to send a message stanza with "from" attribute set to "user#localhost".
I am trying to achieve this with ejabberd. Won't be surprised if I will have to hack down ejabberd src to get this working (if at all possible).
If you are using ejabberd, you can use the {service_check_from, false} option in your service definition to disable the verification on the "from" attribute.
Keep in mind, though, that XEP 0114 requires that the "host" part of the JIDs match the name of the component.
See the corresponding section of ejabberd documentation for all the gory details.
Technically, you have to actually write the component, but this can easily be done.
You have first to confugre ejabberd so that it accepts connections on a specific for your component, with a given componet JID and a password. The default configuration file has several examples, for gateways for example.
Once this is done, connect an XMPP library/client with this component's credential and you should be good to go! The only constraint is that you send valid XML.
Your component will typically only be allowed to send stanzas appearing to be from *#component.domain.com, rather than #.domain.com. This is a security feature.
If you want this functionality, you may have to write a server plugin rather than an external component.
Related
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a REST API which receives some information (let's say events) from clients. Now I need to send some information from the server to clients. I'm trying to add MQTT as an additional way for clients to communicate with the server. Unlike HTTP MQTT allows me to do both: sending and receiving, so it's possible to make MQTT analogs for all existing REST API methods.
Receive events from clients - HTTP, MQTT
Sent commands to clients - MQTT
My idea was to make a "listener" which subscribes to all "event" MQTT topics and translate them into HTTP requests to the REST API (to keep components decoupled). But there is a problem: this listener is a simple client. It doesn't have any special permissions and can't get publisher's credentials to act on his behalf when talking with the REST API. MQTT doesn't even allow a subscriber to get who published a particular message.
One solution is to use MQTT only for sending information from the server to clients and keep using REST API for all incoming requests. But that looks strange :)
Another way is to use broker custom hooks but not all brokers support it and it's not a part of the MQTT specification so it's not very reliable.
Any ideas how to organize it in a proper way?
Given that most (if not all) MQTT brokers support wildcard topics in ACLs you can encode the user in the topic and then grant the agent access to the wild card topic that matches all users.
e.g.
publish to events/<user>
and then grant the agent access to the topic events/+
You can then make sure that the Users ACL makes sure only they can publish to events/<user> such ensuring that users can not impersonate each other.
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I have some problem.
I have client and server. Client connect with server over TCP.
Then, client send some data (separated by chunks), I don't know what is the length of data (TLS handshake). But I know that client send some data with fixed length, and then stop, until not received some response, then he send data with fixed length again.
I need read all chunks, until client stopped send (because so many chunks). How to do that ?
I have only one idea, it's timeout. Read data in loop and set timeout between iterate. If timeout is ended, then data complete collected.
Perhaps there is a more elegant solution?
Based on the information in your comments, you're doing this wrong. The correct way to write an HTTPS proxy is to read the CONNECT line, make the upstream connection, send the appropriate response back o the client, and then if successful start copying bytes in both directions simultaneously. You're not in the least concerned with packets or read sizes, and you should certainly not make any attempt to 'collect' packets before retransmission, as that will just add latency to the system.
You can accomplish this either by starting two threads per connection, one in each direction, or via non-blocking sockets and select()/poll()/epoll(), or whatever that looks like in Go.
BUT I have no idea why you're doing this at all. There are plenty of open-source HTTP proxies already in existence, and as you're dealing with HTTPS there is no value you can possibly add to them. Your claim about 'business logic' is meaningless, or at least unimplementable.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I would like to write some integration tests which verify if user receive registration confirmation e-mails.
Ideally, for this purpose I would like:
Create temporary e-mail account.
Pass it in registration form.
Check if we receive e-mail.
Delete e-mail account.
Are there any disposable e-mail accounts which provides a simple API? I couldn't find any, but existing ones are fairly easy to parse/make requests (e.g. http://10minutemail.com/).
Is this sounds like a good idea? The alternative is use some gmail account and use tags for this purpose. However, dealing with msgs in spam folder, other folders, etc. sounds a bit more complicated.
you can test with your email from Gmail, just append +something to your email address:
myemail#gmail.com
you can have a test account that will deliver to your normal Gmail address:
myemail+testuser1#gmail.com
myemail+testusern#gmail.com
http://mailinator.com supports POP3.
Connect to the server via POP3 with any username and check e-mail.
I know this question is relatively old, but this fits your purposes quite well:
https://www.guerrillamail.com
Disposable email addresses
Emails are deleted after 60 minutes
Customizable temporary email address dashboard
I use it on the daily while testing emails or for signing up for services that I'll only use once, that require email verification.
I highly recommend it!
You may use special services for QA/QC engineers with API:
https://mailtrap.io
http://www.emailvoid.com
https://mailcatcher.me
https://mailsac.com
More you can read in article http://railsware.com/blog/2012/06/18/remove-qa-headache-while-testing-email-delivery/
If you're running on a linux machine it'll already have an email service running (username#localhost... eg root#localhost) which is kinda perfect for testing emailing scripts.
I don't know why you'd go to the trouble of automating this when it would be better to rather use dependency injection and create a mock-mailing class so you can adequately do integration testing - instead of the last stage of transmitting the email it simply writes the content to a file, a database, or just stays alive in the mock-object long enough it can be tested before it's garbage collected.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I am interested to know the technical background of how this services can determine if my email reached the inbox or not(as this is the key servicethis providers offer). If I send an email to somebody wh uses Yahoo messenger or Gmail or maybe just an enterprise email address, what does the ISP have to do with that? Isn't the email filtered after it reached the Yahoo or Enterprise server, and than moved to Inbox or Junk or whatever other folder?
(full disclosure: I currently work for SendGrid as a web developer, so I have some insight but maybe not the low-level technical answers you're seeking)
From a slightly simplistic view, when we go through the SMTP process of delivering a message to an ISP/ESP, we generally know that the message has been "delivered" and we track it as such in your statistics. We also set up feedback loops (FBL's) with ISP's/ESP's which can ping back to us if a user flags a message as spam, which we then subtract from the "delivered" total.
How they route the message and make the decision to move it an Inbox or Junk folder is based on whatever criteria they have, and as far as I know, there is no FBL that can be set up to alert us to that fact.
We do, however, work very hard with our customers to teach them how to "warm up" an IP address for sending good, non-spammy messages, which builds up a "reputation" for an IP address (search google for "sender score"). Obviously the closer to 100% the better. We also have automated systems in place which may alert us if outgoing messages seem "spammy" and we'll put them on hold and alert you so you can make corrections. After all, our reputation is also on the line.
Hope that helps a little.
Well, if I recall correctly, SendGrid uses embedded images in the email and tracks if the image gets loaded as a way to determine if the target user read the email. This, of course, is fairly unreliable.
I certainly never allow my email client to automatically show images by default, so the image won't be requested and SendGrid won't be able to count this email as opened.
See these links for more details... now comes the RTFM! :)
http://docs.sendgrid.com/documentation/apps/click-tracking/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_tracking
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
Ok, I'm a bit confused with these mail protocols so I just have to ask.
I'm making an app for a very special use case we have at work. We have two e-mail servers sending mail to eachother (two seperate domains). The problem is that one of the servers is frequently moved (the server is in the field, and has to be mobile). When that server is moved, it can't be connected to our network and therefore mail cannot be sendt to this server.
What I'm making is an app that will be between our two e-mail servers, intercepting the e-mail trafic that goes between them and, if one of the servers cannot be reached, my app should store the e-mails in a buffer, so that when it detects that the e-mail server is back online, it can safely send the e-mails the other server did not recieve due to it being offline. The e-mails in the buffer should also be able to be sendt to an alternative e-mail so they can be acted upon immidietly should the recieving e-mail server be down for longer than normal...
So, I've figured out that I need to use the SMTP-protocoll to send e-mail, but what do I use to recieve them? All examples I've read so far in C# and Python are about connecting to an allready established POP3/Imap4 server and recieve mail from there, and I think setting up my own POP3/IMAP4 server for intercepting mail before sending it on is doing it the really hard way...
So how do i recieve/intercept e-mail without the use of POP3/IMAP4?
If I understand the question correctly you simply want to buffer your emails. You could be much better off either using a third party to act as a backup mail server or set up additional mail servers as lower priority servers to collect the mail should one of the servers not be reached. You can ask on ServerFault about setting something like this up. I can't see the real benefit of writing an app yourself.
If you do wish to write something yourself then you will most likely wish to write both an SMTP server and and SMTP client one to accept the emails and one to deliver the message.