Fix handling for attachments with file names longer than 76 characters #186
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…f overwriting when multiple dispositions with filename
…rs in a way that is compliant with section 3 of RFC2184 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2184#section-3)
ghost
mentioned this pull request
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Section 3 of RFC 2184 details how attachments with file names that are longer than 76 characters should be dealt with (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2184#section-3). Rather than overwriting the filename field of the attachments, if the content-disposition includes multiple entries of the form filename*X where X is an integer, these values should be concatenated.