Hi, Am 25.10.19 um 16:34 schrieb Wietse Venema: > Why does Postfix not log the original form in addition to the > internal form? That would require code changes to everything code > that logs an envelope sender or recipient. It would have to log > both the original form and the form that Postfix uses for table > lookup, otherwise table lookups would be difficult to debug.
My first intuition on how to fix this, wasn't actually to change the logging drastically, but to add escaping for characters that usually have special meaning in the address. As an example As an example I would log this address "x@y.z> from=<a@b.c> to=<\x@y.z"@example.com somewhat like this to=<x@y.z\> from=\<a@b.c\> to=\<\\x@y...@example.com> The first drawback I see with this is, that it's ugly, but I think that's offset by the benefit, that it's unambiguous. The second drawback would be that it is not what the internal form currently looks like. So the log either doesn't directly show what you have to write in tables, potentially confusing people, but at least to me that seems better than logging things that are as ambiguous as they currently are. > I would just configure Postfix to reject the garbage instead of > doing a lot of work to log the garbage unambiguously. Unfortunately that doesn't solve the problem, because rejecting the mail, doesn't stop the address from showing up in my log. Regards Sven
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
