I also reached out to them on Twitter but they directed me to this form. I followed up with them on Twitter with what happened in this screenshot but they are now ignoring me.

  • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    The only correct regex for email is: .+@.+

    So long as the address has a local part, the at sign, and a hostname, it’s a valid email address.

    Whether it goes somewhere is the tricky part.

    • xantoxis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Sorry, this is not a correct regex for an email address.

      Sending using mail on a local unix system? You only need the local part.

      STOP VALIDATING NAMES AND EMAIL ADDRESSES. Send a verification email. Full stop. Don’t do anything else. You really want to do this anyway, because it’s a defense against bots.

      • Turun@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think it’s fair to prevent users from causing mail sent to your internal systems. It probably won’t cause any issues getting mail to the machine inbox for (no domain name), but it reasonably makes security uneasy.

        • xantoxis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          The statement I was responding to was “This is the correct email regex”. There is no correct email regex. Don’t parse emails with a regex. You probably don’t need to parse emails at all.

      • elrik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes, but no. Pretty much every application that accepts an email address on a form is going to turn around and make an API call to send that email. Guess what that API is going to do when you send it a string for a recipient address without an @ sign? It’s going to refuse it with an error.

        Therefore the correct amount of validation is that which satisfies whatever format the underlying API requires.

        For example, AWS SES requires addresses in the form UserName@[SubDomain.]Domain.TopLevelDomain along with other caveats. If the application is using SES to send emails, I’m not going to allow an input that doesn’t meet those requirements.

        • xantoxis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Therefore the correct amount of validation is that which satisfies whatever format the underlying API requires.

          You mean the validation which the underlying API will perform on its own? You don’t need to do it.

      • laurelraven@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        And this right here is a great example of why simple basic RegEx is rarely adequate

        At the very least, should be something like

        ^[^@\s]+@([^@\s.]+\.)+[^@\s.]+$

        I’m like 99% sure I missed at least a few cases there, and will say “please don’t use this for anything production”

        • jpeps@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Here’s two: you can have multiple @s forming relays in an email address, and you can also break all the rules around dots and spaces if you put quotes around the local part, eg ".sarah.."@emails.com