http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=711152


in reply to Re^3: Practical e-mail address validation (flex)
in thread Practical e-mail address validation

You appear to mean "directly before the @". Thanks for the clarification. Email::Valid::Loose further clarifies:

Email::Valid::Loose is a subclass of Email::Valid, which allows . (dot) before @ (at-mark). It is invalid in RFC822, but is commonly used in some of mobile phone addresses in Japan (like docomo.ne.jp or jp-t.ne.jp).

So the items identified so far:

- tye        

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Practical e-mail address validation (flexes)
by Limbic~Region (Chancellor) on Sep 13, 2008 at 20:36 UTC
    tye,
    They (email addresses with periods immediately preceding the @) were also very common by Microsoft Exchange back when I was working at the DoJ. I am not sure if M$ has become more compliant. I am going to be updating this node with a variety of other ways at attempting to exploit open relays and I will /msg you when complete.

    Update: Rather than enumerate them myself, go to http://www.abuse.net/relay.html and test an MTA you believe to be secure. It shows you all the email addresses it uses to test with (from and to). I also realized I had the relay syntax wrong. It is foo%bar.com@example.com. I have updated the prior node.

    Update: I haven't provided a complete list of "rules" that I think such a theoretical module should include but having "John Smith"@example.com is another one that should be flexible. If I come up with more I will add them here but it has been a long time since I thought about such things. Oh, and I used to have to worry about non-SMTP addresses too like CC:Mail and GroupWise (fortunately not UUCP).

    Cheers - L~R