Hi Wietse,

I understand your perspective on format string limits throughout Postfix. I'd 
like to clarify that my concern is specific to the 200-byte limit imposed on 
the logging of header key/values in INFO header_check lines.

Upon reviewing the code, it appears there are only one limit on 
vstring_sprintf, three limits on msg_info in the code, whereas the rest of the 
%.200s limits are present on msg_warn lines. My request stems from the need to 
log more comprehensive information, such as Authentication-Results headers or 
DKIM Signatures, which often exceed the current 200-character limit. ( they 
header key 'Authentication-Results: ' is using 24 chars already) 

While I acknowledge the effectiveness of 200 bytes for unique identification, I 
would like to highlight that there are additional use cases beyond unique 
identification. In scenarios involving compliance and audit requirements, 
logging detailed header information becomes crucial. The existing limit can 
pose challenges in capturing and analyzing essential data for these purposes.

I appreciate your consideration of these use cases and their implications.

Best regards,
Matthias Schneider


----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
Von: "Wietse Venema via Postfix-users" <postfix-users@postfix.org>
An: "Postfix users" <postfix-users@postfix.org>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 23. Januar 2024 15:40:45
Betreff: [pfx] Re: Feature Request: Adjustable Header Log Size Limit in 
INFO/WARN/REJECT Header_Check

First, there are format string limits all over Postfix. As a matter
of principle I would not make a special case for headers.

Second, the existing 200 byte limit should be plenty sufficient to
uniqiely identify every past, present, and future email message in
this universe and in several other ones.

For example, 200 bytes is more than 3x the length of SHA256 in
hexadecimal notation. SHA256 alone is sufficient to uniquely identify
every particle in the universe(*) with a negligible collision rate.

If you can't do unique identification(**) in 200 bytes, then that
is the problem, not Postfix.

        Wietse

(*) 
https://protection.retarus.com/v1?u=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FEddington_number&c=3ii9Gwp&r=7l05hCnQ6I4bNCXds6AWd6&k=7s1&s=vf77jFIToTkQ7cExLRgDVB9xCtMAahT4xHyJlNSUET0
 
(**) 
https://protection.retarus.com/v1?u=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FUniversally_unique_identifier&c=3ii9Gwp&r=9Emu5N2QwHcOrnvf7mVKa&k=7s1&s=Oi96LJpjp44xzkAa66XQyvQeyXIUZGtaUpgT9RwTxwc
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- postfix-users@postfix.org
To unsubscribe send an email to postfix-users-le...@postfix.org

Reply via email to