Hi,
Is there a way to keep the footer format (or layout)? In the most emails, the footer format is fine but when a user uses digital signature (pgp or S/MIME), it surely breaks the format. It seems that it is possible that the format is broken regardless of the signature issue but I can not track down this case.
For example, the broken format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwukqz2iuqa18cg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.47.16...
The right format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7tqfdxvjb6hxqbg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.48.09...
Maybe, can we use <pre> tag around the footer for the html format of email?
Regards,
--
- DongInn
On 12/12/2016 02:49 PM, Kim, DongInn wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to keep the footer format (or layout)? In the most emails, the footer format is fine but when a user uses digital signature (pgp or S/MIME), it surely breaks the format. It seems that it is possible that the format is broken regardless of the signature issue but I can not track down this case.
For example, the broken format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwukqz2iuqa18cg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.47.16...
The right format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7tqfdxvjb6hxqbg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.48.09...
Maybe, can we use <pre> tag around the footer for the html format of email?
Standard Mailman never puts the footer in an HTML message part. If the message is a single part text/plain message, the footer is appended to the text/plain message. Otherwise it is added as a separate text/plain part.
It could be in your case that unsigned messages are single part text/plain messages and signatures make the message multipart/signed, but even so, the formatting of the footer should not be changed.
The article at <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030707> has more on this. It also has some material about non-standard (and not recommended) patches. Is your Mailman patched in any way to deal with footers and to put them in HTML parts?
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Hi Mark,
Thank you very much for looking into my problem.
I do not know what is going on with the digital signature part but I am wondering if you can take a look at the full raw source of the message and see if there is any clues to debug this issue? This message was sent with my S/MIME signature. http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt <http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt>
The raw source has the correct format of plain text footer but it is ignored and another footer seems to be displayed with the html format. Why does it have two footer contents?
Regards,
--
- DongInn
On Dec 13, 2016, at 1:03 AM, Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> wrote:
On 12/12/2016 02:49 PM, Kim, DongInn wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to keep the footer format (or layout)? In the most emails, the footer format is fine but when a user uses digital signature (pgp or S/MIME), it surely breaks the format. It seems that it is possible that the format is broken regardless of the signature issue but I can not track down this case.
For example, the broken format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwukqz2iuqa18cg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.47.16...
The right format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7tqfdxvjb6hxqbg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.48.09...
Maybe, can we use <pre> tag around the footer for the html format of email?
Standard Mailman never puts the footer in an HTML message part. If the message is a single part text/plain message, the footer is appended to the text/plain message. Otherwise it is added as a separate text/plain part.
It could be in your case that unsigned messages are single part text/plain messages and signatures make the message multipart/signed, but even so, the formatting of the footer should not be changed.
The article at <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030707> has more on this. It also has some material about non-standard (and not recommended) patches. Is your Mailman patched in any way to deal with footers and to put them in HTML parts?
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dikim%40indiana.edu
Mark, there is another thing that I need to mention.
This footer used to work fine with 2.1.15 (i.e., it was fine with the digital signature email) but it seems to have a problem with 2.1.23. Maybe I did anything stupid? :-(
Regards,
--
- DongInn
On Dec 13, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Kim, DongInn <dikim@indiana.edu> wrote:
Hi Mark,
Thank you very much for looking into my problem.
I do not know what is going on with the digital signature part but I am wondering if you can take a look at the full raw source of the message and see if there is any clues to debug this issue? This message was sent with my S/MIME signature. http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt <http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt>
The raw source has the correct format of plain text footer but it is ignored and another footer seems to be displayed with the html format. Why does it have two footer contents?
Regards,
--
- DongInn
On Dec 13, 2016, at 1:03 AM, Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net <mailto:mark@msapiro.net>> wrote:
On 12/12/2016 02:49 PM, Kim, DongInn wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to keep the footer format (or layout)? In the most emails, the footer format is fine but when a user uses digital signature (pgp or S/MIME), it surely breaks the format. It seems that it is possible that the format is broken regardless of the signature issue but I can not track down this case.
For example, the broken format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwukqz2iuqa18cg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.47.16... <https://www.dropbox.com/s/hwukqz2iuqa18cg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.47.16...>
The right format looks like this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7tqfdxvjb6hxqbg/Screenshot%202016-12-12%2017.48.09...
Maybe, can we use <pre> tag around the footer for the html format of email?
Standard Mailman never puts the footer in an HTML message part. If the message is a single part text/plain message, the footer is appended to the text/plain message. Otherwise it is added as a separate text/plain part.
It could be in your case that unsigned messages are single part text/plain messages and signatures make the message multipart/signed, but even so, the formatting of the footer should not be changed.
The article at <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030707 <https://wiki.list.org/x/4030707>> has more on this. It also has some material about non-standard (and not recommended) patches. Is your Mailman patched in any way to deal with footers and to put them in HTML parts?
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net <mailto:mark@msapiro.net>> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org <mailto:Mailman-Users@python.org> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users> Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/dikim%40indiana.edu
On 12/13/2016 01:31 PM, Kim, DongInn wrote:
I do not know what is going on with the digital signature part but I am wondering if you can take a look at the full raw source of the message and see if there is any clues to debug this issue? This message was sent with my S/MIME signature. http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt <http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt>
The raw source has the correct format of plain text footer but it is ignored and another footer seems to be displayed with the html format. Why does it have two footer contents?
I don't know the answer to that, but I can tell you the Mailman 2.1.23 did not add the text/html footer. Something in the delivery chain after Mailman converted Mailman's text/plain footer into multipart/alternative with Mailman's original text/plain footer as the first alternative and the garbled text/html footer as the second alternative.
A clue is whatever did that also added the web bug
<img src="https://u1524457.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/open?upn=FkTv6GMOKAeoJi-2BuKcaB7j2pviCy3..." alt="" width="1" height="1" border="0" style="height:1px !important;width:1px !important;border-width:0 !important;margin-top:0 !important;margin-bottom:0 !important;margin-right:0 !important;margin-left:0 !important;padding-top:0 !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;padding-right:0 !important;padding-left:0 !important;"/>
It looks like the first MTA in the delivery chain is ismtpd0003p1sjc2.sendgrid.net and that this is a "smarthost" used by Mailman at isocpp.org for delivery as the message is relayed through ismtpd0003p1sjc2.sendgrid.net, filter0120p1las1.sendgrid.net and o1.30e.fshared.sendgrid.net before being delivered to the MX for indiana.edu.
It is almost 100% certain that it is something at sendgrid.net that is both munging the text/plain footer into the multipart/alternative and adding the web bug to the html alternative.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Send grid gives you the ability to see if someone opened the email, etc. clearly it was sendgrid that added that (and that's why I don't use sendgrid).
Adam Goldberg 202-507-9900
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:52 PM -0500, "Mark Sapiro" <mark@msapiro.net<mailto:mark@msapiro.net>> wrote:
On 12/13/2016 01:31 PM, Kim, DongInn wrote:
I do not know what is going on with the digital signature part but I am wondering if you can take a look at the full raw source of the message and see if there is any clues to debug this issue? This message was sent with my S/MIME signature. http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt <http://www.crest.iu.edu/~dikim/mailman_footer.txt>
The raw source has the correct format of plain text footer but it is ignored and another footer seems to be displayed with the html format. Why does it have two footer contents?
I don't know the answer to that, but I can tell you the Mailman 2.1.23 did not add the text/html footer. Something in the delivery chain after Mailman converted Mailman's text/plain footer into multipart/alternative with Mailman's original text/plain footer as the first alternative and the garbled text/html footer as the second alternative.
A clue is whatever did that also added the web bug
<img src="https://u1524457.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/open?upn=FkTv6GMOKAeoJi-2BuKcaB7j2pviCy3..." alt="" width="1" height="1" border="0" style="height:1px !important;width:1px !important;border-width:0 !important;margin-top:0 !important;margin-bottom:0 !important;margin-right:0 !important;margin-left:0 !important;padding-top:0 !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;padding-right:0 !important;padding-left:0 !important;"/>
It looks like the first MTA in the delivery chain is ismtpd0003p1sjc2.sendgrid.net and that this is a "smarthost" used by Mailman at isocpp.org for delivery as the message is relayed through ismtpd0003p1sjc2.sendgrid.net, filter0120p1las1.sendgrid.net and o1.30e.fshared.sendgrid.net before being delivered to the MX for indiana.edu.
It is almost 100% certain that it is something at sendgrid.net that is both munging the text/plain footer into the multipart/alternative and adding the web bug to the html alternative.
-- Mark Sapiro <mark@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/adam%40agp-llc.com
participants (3)
-
Adam Goldberg -
Kim, DongInn -
Mark Sapiro