Programmer Humor

I scored 18/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

12/21

are things that are considered out of current spec really "valid" though?

Let us recite the email validator’s oath:

If it has something before the @, something between the @ and the ., and something after the ., it’s valid enough.

I scored 13/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

I lost it at the fork bomb. I mean I hit valid because there was no way it was on the and not valid, but there's no way i'd have expected that. after that I just kept guessing the most stupid answer and did pretty well

I gave up when I got like 5 wrong. I've ran mail servers for decades, most of the invalid "valids" would get rejected by any mailservers I've administered.

I scored 16/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

Damn, and here I thought I had this locked down because I was salty that so many places struggle with + in the email addy. But my god, there's comments?

Average :/

I scored 16/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

I don't validate emails, I test them.

That's your email? OK, what did we send it? if we couldn't send to it or the user can't read it there's no reason to accept it.

OK, maybe I do some light validation first, but I don't trust the email address just because it's email-address-shaped.

I scored 12/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.

17/21. Would have been 18 but the first example of spaces screwed me.

What if we 👉@👈 ..? 🤭

I don't care who the IRS sends, I am not validating emails with spaces on them.

I don't think it really matters what the standard is, because you'll be completely limited by some 25 year old bit of Regex from Stack Overflow that every web developer ever has implemented into their form sanity checks.

13 right answers and I didn't expect so many lol

I'll never validate some of the 💩 I've learnt today.

Wow. if I ever have the madness required to self-host, I'll have my email at an IP address.

If qoutes are removed and internal spaces are invalid, how could ":(){␣:|:&␣};:"@example.com be valid?

I got 13/21. I mean thats not bad 😄

Question 5 is incorrect, name@example is a fully valid email address, even after RFC 2822

The spec of RFC 2822 defines an address (3.4.1) as:

local- part "@" domain

domain is defined (3.4.1) as:

domain = dot-atom / domain-literal / obs-domain

dot-atom is defined (3.2.4) as:

dot-atom = [CFWS] dot-atom-text [CFWS]
dot-atom-text = 1*atext *("." 1*atext)

1*atext meaning at least 1 alphanumeric character, followed by *("." 1*atext) meaning at least 0 "." 1*atext

If tomorrow, google decided to use its google top-level domain as an email domain, it would be perfectly valid, as could any other company owning top-level domains

Google even owns a gmail TLD so I wouldn't even be surprised if they decided to use it

👉@👈

Pretty much everything I've seen in e-mail is needlessly complicated and weird. So of course addresses are as well.

Two of my "favorite" features it didn't even touch on. You can have nested comments:

foo(one(two(three(four(five(six(seven)))))))@example.com

This will actually fail on that big email regex that gets copied around (originally from Mastering Regular Expressions in 1997), because it can only handle comment nesting to a depth of six. It is actually possible to do indefinite nesting now with recursive regex, but it was developed before that feature existed.

RFC822 also allows routing addresses through multiple servers:

<@foo.example.com@bar.example.com:123@example.com>

But this is almost always denied on modern email servers because it was abused by spammers.