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 just requested a hotfix from support.microsoft.com and put in my email address, but I haven't received the email yet. The splash page I got after I requested the hotfix said:
Hotfix Confirmation
We will send these hotfixes to the following e-mail address:
(my correct email address)
Usually, our hotfix e-mail is delivered to you within five minutes. However, sometimes unforeseen issues in e-mail delivery systems may cause delays.
We will send the e-mail from the “hotfix#microsoft.com” e-mail account. If you use an e-mail filter or a SPAM blocker, we recommend that you add “hotfix#microsoft.com” or the “microsoft.com” domain to your safe senders list. (The safe senders list is also known as a whitelist or an approved senders list.) This will help prevent our e-mail from going into your junk e-mail folder or being automatically deleted.
I'm sure that the email is not getting caught in a spam catcher.
How long does it normally take to get one of these hotfixes? Am I waiting for some human to approve it, or something? Should I just give up and try to get the file I need some other way?
(Update: Replaced "me#mycompany.com" with "(my correct email address)" to resolve Martín Marconcini's ambiguity.)
Took about a day for me when I requested one so I suspect some sort of manual/semi-automated process has to complete before you get the e-mail.
Give it a day before you start bugging them ;)
It usually arrives within the first hour. BUt the fact that it reads me#mycompany.com could either because you put it there to protect your privacy (in which case forget about this) or that the system didn't catch your email and they sent it to me#mycompany.com.
If the email address was ok and you didn't get it, somehow it bounced or it won't arrive. I'd suggest you contact them again providing an alternate email (gmail or such) to make sure that you don't experience any problems.
Last time I received a hotfix it took them 10 minutes.
Good luck with that!
Related
This question was migrated from Stack Overflow because it can be answered on Emacs Stack Exchange.
Migrated last month.
I use notmuch in emacs for e-mail and I love it, but I need help in customizing how it handles replies.
I use two e-mail addresses, a personal one and a work one. Most of the time, when I get work e-mail my e-mail address is in the header, and the automatic reply functionality works fine. However, often a work e-mail will come in without my address in the header: for instance, through an Outlook mailing list. In this case, the reply function defaults to my personal e-mail address, which I do not want.
I've already created a function that allows me to change the sender address with a keybinding, but in the moment it is easy to forget to do this. A more seamless experience would greatly improve my life. How can I customize the reply functionality, perhaps conditional on tags or on whether the sender's address contains my work domain?
I'm looking for a way to know definitively if an email I receive is in response to a specific email I sent. I manually set the Message-Id of the outgoing message using make_msgid, store this value, and then check the In-Reply-To of an incoming email to determine if it is equal to the original Message-Id I sent.
This approach is basically what is suggested here in this very helpful answer by Mohammad Eghlima.
But I wonder if this approach is "foolproof" and if there is a better way to accomplish this? For example if there are some clients other than outlook, gmail etc. that do not follow this convention of setting In-Reply-To to the Message-Id of the original mail for replies, or if they set their own Message-Id for some reason (ex. Gmail does this if it determines the existing message id doesn't follow RFC standards)?
I've seen some other answers mention other potential methods to accomplish what I'm trying to do - for example, here but most of these questions/answers are from 10 years ago so I'm wondering if there is a better way to accomplish this now.
No, nothing is entirely foolproof. Junior PHP programmers write new email-sending code every day and none of it conforms to any particular set of conventions or RFCs. And then there's Microsoft and Google ... Oh, you are already familiar with them.
There have been no significant developments in email standardization on this particular front in the last decade, so advice from 10 years ago is by and large still relevant.
If anything, the field has been polarized by Microsoft and Google plunging ahead to "innovate" in various aspects of what may charitably be characterized as usability improvements over traditional email, but the motivation has often been to silo in users to prefer or be forced to use their solutions, not standardize anything.
(The efforts to improve e.g. email security through DMARC etc has been better coordinated and standardized.)
The post you link to basically summarizes the information from D. J. Bernstein's excellent email reference resource https://cr.yp.to/mail.html; see in particular the threading conventions at https://cr.yp.to/immhf/thread.html
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 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I've registered a GitHub account to test their email verification process. So:
They've sent me an email with a link, containing my username and 40-chars code, like:
https://github.com/users/USERNAME/emails/120066679/confirm_verification/47889d71648523e5d99db5b969f59809c2715fb6
I have not followed the link
4 days later, the've sent me another (a reminder), that I have to verify my email, containing link with another different 40-chars code
So, what was the purpose of changing 40-chars code? As I remember, other services, used to expire verification code anyway. If there is already a username in verification link, is there really a need to do that? In case of brute force, I can just count failed attempts related to specific user and block it, right?
P.S. Also interesting, what is the purpose of emails/120066679 in link? (which is similar for both letters)
There are several reasons why quick expiration of verification codes is the best practice.
If protection with a verification code is deemed appropriate, it's safest to make it not only complex enough but also valid for minimum amount of time. If you only make the code work for the time needed (usually really short), you diminish the risk of someone abusing it. (For example, someone could programmatically 'guess' the codes - the more time for this exercise, the higher chance for success.)
Also, it's not efficient to store data of this kind. It's used once, it doesn't contain any actual information and as soon as it's used, it's ready to be "thrown away". It's not a good practice to store anything that doesn't add value when stored.
In addition, it's fairly rare that users don't use the codes immediately/soon. For the small percentage of cases where the code expires by the time the user tries to use it, it's more efficient to generate new ones.
Well, the purpose of an email validation link is to make sure that you actually own the email. Most validation links simply contain some secret that they send out your way, only in the possession of which may you verify the email address.
The reason they changed the code is because it probably expires. In that case you could not activate the account, so they sent you another in case you'd like to continue.
What if they don't send out a secret like this then?
In that case there is nothing that prevents an attacker from "verifying" emails that they actually have no control over. They could just visit the url with the username plugged in and activate the account.
Normal users would not do this, but spammers might.
For the case of brute force:
If the secret is sufficiently random, and the keyspace is large enough, trying to guess it is a fool's errand.
We can assume this is a random 40 hex char number, which gives us:
16**40 == 1461501637330902918203684832716283019655932542976
possible values for it. It is safe to say that no one will guess this number in the near future.
This Odoo company we're working with basically sends a lot of e-mail. One e-mail thread can turn into 100+ e-mails with different people brought into the conversation (CC'd) at different times. Due to the complexity of their e-mail management, they want to use their Gmail interface (Google Hosted) and CC an e-mail into odoo and they want it to get tracked in a thread. I've basically already done that... they have an e-mail like odoo+res.partner-432#domain.com (although it's hashed to not be easily readable) - they CC this and the full body thread gets included in chatter (mail.message) under respective model / id.
The challenge with this: the chatter messages can get huge very fast, due to their e-mail messages (because each e-mail includes main reply, and all previous history on thread). I've looked into some systems that have a "reply above this line" - and it just takes the latest message. And in those systems, eg. ticketing systems such as Zendesk, help scout, I believe the teams are using the ticketing system (not a gmail) and thus there is much more control over the inbox and incoming email (not to mention, those e-mails are usually 1-to-1, not including groups).
My questions:
Is there any other workaround that you see here to have odoo pull in only the last e-mail reply and not the full e-mail thread? I could probably build something like this: https://github.com/zapier/email-reply-parser - and hook it into odoos e-mail parsing, but that works on text format e-mails only (not HTML)... only. So it's not bulletproof, and I'm not sure it's worth it.
Even if this client DID use odoo 100%, I still don't think it would be possible to get it to work the way they want without major customizations (eg. Odoo's default behavior is to include all past e-mail threads)
I'm curious if anyone here see's any other solutions, otherwise – I doubt there is something here I haven't seen. :) (But very open to be proven incorrect!)
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 11 years ago.
Improve this question
I was asked to recall a message I sent out to remove some personal info from it and replace it with a generic made up person as an example.
Does message recall really work?
It's my opinion because you get told a message has been recalled it just causes you to want to find out what was in the original message. All you do is find someone who had already read it.
Can exchange server be adjusted to not tell users when a message is recalled or replaced?
What about bcc, recall doesn't seem to work on these and global emails tend to be the ones you really need to recall.
EDIT Also people with smartphones which is common now don't seem to get email retrieved from their phone either
In most cases, it's too late, it just let's me know there was an email you didn't want me to read.
Only works on unopened mail, for users of MS Exchange/Outlook.
read this blog post and comments for more information.
To add a bit of information, if the message is displayed in a preview pane, it is considered read making recalling impossible.
We did some testing just yeasterday and discovered that the recall feature is pretty lame. As mentioned above it is only recalled if it is unread (or unpreviewed). In the case where it has been read, the recall only makes the message MORE obvious. Not the desired effect by far.
Only works on unopened mail, local to the server you sent it on. (as far as I know, I suppose it could work on server farms/clusters too?)
If the recipient is offline and message is not delivered to his PST by the Exchange server, then RECALL works and you get the message accordingly.
Thanks & Regards,
Ajay
Yes it is true that the Recall This Message Outlook functionality very often does not work.
WinDeveloper just released a server-side solution for Excahnge 2007/2010. It works equally well for both emails addressed to local recipients and for emails sent to foreign recipients. For more details:
WinDeveloper vs Native Exchange Message Recalling
http://www.windeveloper.com/recall/recall_features.htm
Message Recalling Works! Here is how
http://www.windeveloper.com/recall/recall_howitworks.htm