From: Dominikus Scherkl (Dominikus.Scherkl@glueckkanja.com)
Date: Thu Oct 31 2002 - 05:02:42 EST
Markus Scherer wrote:
> Chances are nearly 100% that overlong UTF-8 was a
> spoofing attempt, or the result of something other than a
> UTF-8 encoder.
Correct. This is exactly my topic.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a standardized way to indicate
that an attack to the message has occured without hiding
the contained information from the user?
The way we do this yet, is popping up some alert box, but
this does not remain in the text.
And using any unassigned or forbidden codepoint (as you
suggested) would keep it's meaning only for the application
which converted the text (in our case a small tool decoding
encrypted messages - which will never see the text again).
And leaving any other mark in the text is at least
non-standard, so most unicode-tools can't use it (which is
But ok, it is not that important. Would only be nice.
-- Dominikus Scherkl email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 31 2002 - 06:06:44 EST