eml-codec

⚠️ Work in progress, do not use in production
⚠️ This is currently only a decoder (parser), encoding is not yet implemented.

About the name

This library does not aim at implementing a specific RFC, but to be a swiss-army knife to decode and encode ("codec") what is generaly considered an email (generally abbreviated "eml"), hence the name: eml-codec.

Goals

• Maintainability - modifying the code does not create regression and is possible for someone exterior to the project. Keep cyclomatic complexity low.
• Composability - build your own parser by picking the relevant passes, avoid work that is not needed.
• Compatibility - always try to parse something, do not panic or return an error.
• Exhaustivity - serve as a common project to encode knowledge about emails (existing mime types, existing headers, etc.).

Non goals

• Parsing optimization that would make more complicated to understand the logic.
• Optimization for a specific use case, to the detriment of other use cases.
• Pipelining/streaming/buffering as the parser can arbitrarily backtrack + our result contains reference to the whole buffer, imf-codec must keep the whole buffer in memory. Avoiding the sequential approach would certainly speed-up a little bit the parsing, but it's too much work to implement currently.
• Zerocopy. It might be implementable in the future, but to quickly bootstrap this project, I avoided it for now.

Missing / known bugs

Current known limitations/bugs:

• Resent Header Fields are not implemented
• Return-Path/Received headers might be hard to use as their order is important, and it's currently lost in the final datastructure.
• Datetime parsing of invalid date might return None instead of falling back to the bad_body field
• Comments contained in the email headers are dropped during parsing
• No support is provided for message/external-body (read data from local computer) and message/partial (aggregate multiple fragmented emails) as they seem obsolete and dangerous to implement.

Design

Speak about parser combinators.

Testing strategy

imf-codec aims to be as much tested as possible against reald

Unit testing: parser combinator independently (done)

Selected full emails (expected)

Existing datasets

Enron 500k - Took 20 minutes to parse ~517k emails and check that RFC5322 headers (From, To, Cc, etc.) are correctly parsed. From this list, we had to exclude ~50 emails on which the From/To/Cc fields were simply completely wrong, but while some fields failed to parse, the parser did not crash and parsed the other fields of the email correctly.

Run it on your machine:

cargo test -- --ignored --nocapture enron500k

Planned: jpbush, my inbox, etc.

Fuzzing (expected)

Across reference IMAP servers (dovevot, cyrus) (expected)

Targeted RFC and IANA references

🚩	#	Name
🟩	822	ARPA INTERNET TEXT MESSAGES
🟩	2822	Internet Message Format (2001)
🟩	5322	Internet Message Format (2008)
🟩	2045	↳ Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies
🟩	2046	↳ Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types
🟩	2047	↳ MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text
🟩	2048	↳ Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures
🟩	2049	↳ Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples
		Headers extensions
🔴	2183	↳ Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages: The Content-Disposition Header Field
🔴	6532	↳ Internationalized Email Headers
🔴	9228	↳ Delivered-To Email Header Field
		MIME extensions
🔴	1847	↳ Security Multiparts for MIME: Multipart/Signed and Multipart/Encrypted
🔴	2387	↳ The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type
🔴	3462	↳ The Multipart/Report Content Type for the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages
🔴	3798	↳ Message Disposition Notification
🔴	6838	↳ Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures

IANA references :

• (tbd) MIME subtypes
• IANA character sets

State of the art / alternatives

stalwartlab/mail_parser