On 20 Aug 2013, at 05:21 , Marcio Merlone <marcio.merlone@...
> Em 19-08-2013 18:35, Jeroen Geilman escreveu:
>> On 08/19/2013 06:24 PM, Marcio Merlone wrote:
>>> I run a mail server for my company with Ubuntu 10.04 LTS and postfix 2.7.0-1ubuntu0.2 and all my users use Thunderbird ESR. We have a customer running Symantec Messaging Gateway and it converts attachments of our messages with *special chars* to "randombogusfilename.dat" (_not_ winmail.dat!). Their support directed me to this Symantec KB which, in short, says "it's not our fault", even though they are the only destination where I have noticed this:
>>> Has anyone experienced this or know what's this about and how to fix/workaround this? Searched Google but no luck.
>> If you're paying for Symantec support, by all means open a trouble ticket and force some cooperation for your dollars.
> My customer is. Customers are always rigth, by definition. ;) They are researching on their side (I hope) with Symantec. But they are not yet entirely convinced it's their fault, as the KB above says.
Interesting. That is one of the most worthless KBs I've ever seen. There is no explanation at all and no indication as to what they think incorrectly constructed emails are. So, I'll make a WAG that fits in with my (deservedly low) opinion of Symantec:
"We get confused by things like UTF-8 and, really, any character encoding that is not based on obsolete Windows code pages, so we declare by fiat that all these messages are 'incorrect' and shove them into an attachment because we are incompetent fools who cannot be bothered to work well with anyone else."
I don't *know* that is the reason, but I suspect (highly) I'm on the right track.
>> A good start would be full message decodes on both sides (the raw message both on the client and in the mailbox), as well as packet dumps on both ends, to see how the message was altered in transit (if it was.)
> It is. If I mail an attachment to my boss and cc my customer, my boss gets it correctly but my customer get a .dat attach. Only this customer.
What is in the .dat file? How is the message you sent encoded? Maybe they can't figure out mime? uudecode?
>> A tcpdump comparison between the client-side and the mailbox-side would show if Symantec is correct in that their mail-gateway-software-money-making-machine does not alter the message in transit, or if it does.
> Your and all experience: is there how to workaround (and thus giving my customer a hint on how to fix) this behavior of SMG? Will fuzz with message encoding on Thunderbird and test what happens, but rather not reinvent the wheel.
You need to get one of these dat files and see what it contains, exactly, and compare that to the message you sent (and then to a copy of the message you send to, say, a gmail account. There is a chance, albeit a vanishingly small chance, that Symantec are technically correct.
Well, no, not really.
I AM ZOMBOR! (kelly) ZOMBOR!