Subject: FW: Canonicalisation of embedded MIME objects

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 10:56:57 +0100

I posted this earlier but got only one response and no help.

Can anyone help or point me in the right direction where I may find 
clarification.

I am aware that the standards say "be modest in what you send and generous in 
what you accept" but It seems that a significant number of people/implementers 
are not following the standard as defined.

Bartley.

-----Original Message-----
From: O'Malley, Bartley 
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 1:03 PM
To: 'ietf-smime'
Subject: Canonicalisation of embedded MIME objects

I have noticed that a number of files as produced by different mail programs do 
not seem to be performing canonicalisation of inner objects correctly.

The inner objects use LF for line termination not CRLF pairs. It is my 
understanding that breaks MIME rules for canonicalising embedded objects.

To illustrate the problem I enclose a signed-then-encrypted message I have 
received:(I have removed the routing information)

The outer message appears as follows(All lines are terminated with <CRLF> 
pairs.).
-----------------------------------------------------------
Content-Type: application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=encrypted-data;                
              name="xxx.p7m"                                                    
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=xxx.p7m                               
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64                                               
Message-ID: 19991015:080159:REF12345                                            
                                                                                
MIIbrgYJKoZIhvcNAQcDoIIbnzCCG5sCAQAxggHEMIHfAgEAMEgwQDELMAkGA1UEBhMCVVMx        
ETAPBgNVBAoTCENpdGljb3JwMR4wHAYDVQQLExVFbnRydXN0IERldmVsb3BtZW50IDICBDUa
:
:        
VgIT6ci+93vJE1yRs4la/s3WjmovuOg/PSWUwXiw11EbAmBoB6CitHYFM/Q5sC4RdXrwyH2l        
1y59mZTTTtLwr7AbuOlojs/KrIe51CYQMeu14XN/K1tKZXpmB0qgcyDmXq69WYEo+aKglqhJ        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

The embedded message looks as follows(All lines are terminated with <LF>).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content-Type: application/pkcs7-mime; smime-type=signed-data;
              name="xxx.p7m"
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=xxx.p7m
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Message-ID: 19990225:131734:20499

MIIggQYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIIgcjCCIG4CAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIISiwYJKoZIhvcNAQcB
:
:
mXw0F0zhCL+ZZdic+fmLh1BQ+rIkVu45zKfJVSI1/F9oyZdaVFMkt0NZaGdjSlvuG6deAhgZ
XJ0KskSW4qT5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The inner application file looks as follows: With Content lines terminated with 
<LF> and the data segment with no line ends.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Content-Type: application/EDIFACT;
              name="xxx.edi"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary

UNA:+.? 'UNB+UNOA:1+

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is my interpretation that the use of <LF> to terminate the Content headers 
in the latter two messages above is not valid.

Can someone provide me with a definitive answer.

Thanks,
Bartley.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:44:37 +0100

Ahmed,
 thanks for your reply. The canonicalisation I refer to is defined in RFC45 
section 6.6 page 19 and more specifically again in RFC2049 section 4 subsection 
2 second paragraph page 10. It states:

"For example in the case of text/plain data, the text must be converted to a 
supported character set and lines must be delimited with CRLF delimiters in 
accordance with RFC 822..."

It is my interpretation that ALL embedded objects must have valid <CRLF> line 
ends on their MIME headers. ALL body parts, except binary, must also have valid 
<CRLF> line ends. Just as the outer MIME message has.

Your comments will be very much appreciated.

Regards,
Bartley.
-----Original Message-----
From: zahid.ahmed [SMTP:[email-masked]]
Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2000 1:45 AM
To: bartley.omalley
Cc: zahid.ahmed
Subject: RE: Canonicalisation of embedded MIME objects

can you define what you mean by Canonicalisation of multipart mime?
What specific requirements and assumption you have?

thanks,
Zahid Ahmed

> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 2:57 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: FW: Canonicalisation of embedded MIME objects
> 
>