67 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
67 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From mrc+imap at panda.com Mon Jun 14 15:28:30 2010
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Mark Crispin <mrc+imap@panda.com>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:44 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] IMAP MOVE extension
|
|
In-Reply-To: <201006142330.15547.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
References: <201006110854.37969.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
<201006142216.41783.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
<alpine.OSX.2.00.1006141354350.662@hsinghsing.panda.com>
|
|
<201006142330.15547.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
|
|
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1006141445490.662@hsinghsing.panda.com>
|
|
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Witold Kr?cicki wrote:
|
|
> Then why it exists in Tb?
|
|
|
|
Thunderbird is the descendant of Netscape Messenger. Messenger started
|
|
when Netscape was an independent company. AOL bought Netscape in 1998;
|
|
and the Mozilla Organization began in 1998 under AOL's aegis and largely
|
|
staffed with Netscape/AOL employees. AOL decided to split off Mozilla in
|
|
2003, and transferred intellectual property to the newly-formed Mozilla
|
|
Foundation (along with $2 million over two years).
|
|
|
|
It is not surprising that Thunderbird would inherit from Messenger. AOL
|
|
transferred IP, and thus the Thunderbird developers were able to use the
|
|
Messenger codebase.
|
|
|
|
I do not know know how much of the Messenger codebase remains in
|
|
Thunderbird; certainly a great deal of the current code is new.
|
|
|
|
Nevertheless, Thunderbird's pedigree disqualifies it as an independent
|
|
implementation that just happened to find out about AOL's extension and
|
|
say "ooh, we want this."
|
|
|
|
Whether or not the current Thunderbird developers would add such a thing
|
|
now is something that we can only speculate. It may never have been
|
|
called to their attention.
|
|
|
|
That code path is a vulnerability in Thunderbird. It is very easy for a
|
|
server to abolish Thunderbird as a client via an bad implementation. It
|
|
happens all the time, and not just in the IMAP world. I won't name the
|
|
guilty; but surely you have heard of "embrace, extend, destroy".
|
|
|
|
It isn't a question of "if". There will be such problems. We know of the
|
|
unintentional problems caused by the temptation to misimplement is so
|
|
tempting in a Maildir based store. That has been discussed to death.
|
|
|
|
In a perfect world, where everybody reads all the requirements of
|
|
specifications, strictly follows all the syntax, and never thinks about
|
|
something that would undermine a competitor's product, we would not have
|
|
to worry about such things.
|
|
|
|
>> The only mail store that could implement MOVE atomically is a database
|
|
>> that was poorly-designed so that COPY is slow and MOVE is fast.
|
|
> So the correct design of a database is that MOVE is slow and COPY is fast?
|
|
> iiinteresting....
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
|
|
The correct design of a database is that COPY is fast and MOVE is nearly
|
|
as fast or even equal.
|
|
|
|
-- Mark --
|
|
|
|
http://panda.com/mrc
|
|
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
|
|
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
|