Sieve Email Filtering: Ihave Extension
draft-freed-sieve-ihave-03

Status of this Memo

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on April 12, 2009.

Abstract

This document describes the "ihave" extension to the Sieve email filtering language. The "ihave" extension provides a means to write scripts that can take advantage of optional Sieve features but can still run when those optional features are not available. The extension also defines a new error control command intended to be used to report situations where no combination of available extensions satisfies the needs of the script.

Change History (to be removed prior to publication as an RFC)

Changed the comparator used in the ihave test from "i;ascii-casemap" to "i;octet".

Updated the IANA registration template.

Simplified the semantics of ihave to be independent of block structure.

Moved the environment extension to a separate document so the standards status of the two extensions can be different.

Added error action.

Added some text to make the portability advantages of ihave clearer.

Added a note about the possibility that the argument to error uses UTF-8 characters.

(from WGLC) Various editorial fixups.

(from WGLC) Incorporated the same short-circuit, left to right requirements the variables extension imposes, because without it invocation of the variables extension could potentially change the meaning of ihave constructs in anyof or allof clauses.

(from WGLC) Added a resriction that ihave MUST NOT be used with any extension that changes the underlying Sieve grammar. Hopefully there won't be any such extensions, but better safe than sorry.

1.  Introduction

Sieve [RFC5228] (Guenther, P. and T. Showalter, “Sieve: An Email Filtering Language,” January 2008.) is a language for filtering email messages at or around the time of final delivery. It is designed to be implementable on either a mail client or mail server. It is suitable for running on a mail server where users may not be allowed to execute arbitrary programs, such as on black box Internet Message Access Protocol [RFC3501] (Crispin, M., “INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4rev1,” March 2003.) servers, as it has no user-controlled loops or the ability to run external programs.

Various sieve extensions have already been defined, e.g., [RFC5229] (Homme, K., “Sieve Email Filtering: Variables Extension,” January 2008.) [RFC5230] (Showalter, T. and N. Freed, “Sieve Email Filtering: Vacation Extension,” January 2008.) [RFC5231] (Segmuller, W. and B. Leiba, “Sieve Email Filtering: Relational Extension,” January 2008.) [RFC5232] (Melnikov, A., “Sieve Email Filtering: Imap4flags Extension,” January 2008.) [RFC5233] (Murchison, K., “Sieve Email Filtering: Subaddress Extension,” January 2008.) [RFC5235] (Daboo, C., “Sieve Email Filtering: Spamtest and Virustest Extensions,” January 2008.), and many more are sure to be created over time. Sieve's require clause is used to specify the extensions a particular sieve needs; an error results if the script's require clause calls for an extension that isn't available. This mechanism is sufficient in most situations. However, there can be cases where a script may be able to take advantage of an extension if it is available but can still operate if it is not, possibly with some degradation of functionality. Cases can also arise where a script would prefer one extension but can employ a different one if the first one is not available.

The "ihave" extension provides a means to write scripts that make use of extensions only when they are actually available. Ihave defines a new ihave test that takes a list of capability names as an argument and succeeds if and only if all of those capabilities are present. Additionally, specification of the "ihave" extension in the require clause disables parse time checking of extension use in scripts; run-time checking must be used instead. This makes it possible to write portable scripts that can operate in multiple environments making effective use of whatever extensions are available even though differing sets of extensions are provided in different places.

The "ihave" extension also defines a new error control command. Error causes script execution to terminate with the error message given as the argument to the error control.

2.  Conventions Used in this Document

"The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.).

The terms used to describe the various components of the Sieve language are taken from Section 1.1 of [RFC5228] (Guenther, P. and T. Showalter, “Sieve: An Email Filtering Language,” January 2008.).

3.  Capability Identifiers

The capability string associated with the extension defined in this document is "ihave".

4.  Ihave Test

Usage:   ihave <capabilities: string-list>

The ihave test provides a means for Sieve scripts to test for the existence of a given extension prior to actually using it. The capabilities argument to ihave is the same as the similarly-named argument to the require control statement: It specifies the names of one or more Sieve extensions or comparators. The ihave test succeeds if all the extensions specified in the capabilities list are available to the script.

Unlike most Sieve tests, ihave accepts no match or comparator arguments. The type of match for ihave is always ":is" and the comparator is always "i;octet".

The strings in the capabilities list are constant strings in the context of Sieve variables [RFC5229] (Homme, K., “Sieve Email Filtering: Variables Extension,” January 2008.). It is an error to pass a non-constant string as an argument to ihave.

The Sieve base specification demands that all Sieve extensions used in a given script be specified in the initial require control statement. It is an error for a script to call for extensions the interpreter doesn't support or to attempt to use extensions that have not been listed in the script's require clause. Using ihave changes Sieve interpreter behavior and the underlying requirements in the following ways:

1. Use of a given extension is allowed subsequent to the successful evaluation of an ihave test on that extension all the way to the end of the script, even outside the block enclosed by the ihave test. In other words, subsequent to a successful ihave things operate just as if the extension had been specified in the script's require clause. The extension cannot be used prior to the evaluation of such a test and a runtime error MUST be generated if such usage is attempted. However, subsequent use of that extension may still need to be conditionally handled via an ihave test to deal with the case where it is not supported. The extension cannot be used prior to the evaluation of such a test and a runtime error MUST be generated if such usage is attempted.
2. Sieve interpreters normally have the option of checking extension use at either parse time or execution time. The specification of "ihave" in a script's require clause changes this behavior: Scripts MUST either defer extension checking to run time or else take the presence of ihave tests into account at parse time. Note that since ihave can be used inside of anyof, allof, and not tests full parse time checking of ihave may be very difficult to implement.
3. Although it makes little sense to do so, an extension can be specified in both the require control statement and in an ihave test. If this is done and the extension has been implemented the extension can be used anywhere in the script and an ihave test of that extension will always return true.
4. Ihave accepts a list of capabilities. The ihave test fails and none of the capabilities are enabled if any of the specified capabilities are unavailable.
5. The Sieve base specification does not require that interpreters evaluate arguments in any particular order or that test evaluation be short-circuited. If ihave is enabled the interpreter MUST short-circuit tests, i.e., not perform more tests than necessary to find the result. Additionally, evaluation order MUST be left to right if ihave is enabled.

Ihave is designed to be used with extensions that add tests, actions, comparators, or arguments. It MUST NOT be used with extensions that change the underlying Sieve grammer or extensions like variables [RFC5229] (Homme, K., “Sieve Email Filtering: Variables Extension,” January 2008.) that change how the content of Sieve scripts are interpreted.

5.  Error Control

Usage:   error <message: string>

The error control causes script execution to terminate with a run-time error. The message argument provides a text description of the error condition that SHOULD be included in any generated report regarding the error. Section 2.10.6 of [RFC5228] (Guenther, P. and T. Showalter, “Sieve: An Email Filtering Language,” January 2008.) describes how run-time errors are handled in Sieve.

Note that the message argument, like all Sieve strings, employs the UTF-8 charset and can contain non-US-ASCII characters. This must be taken into consideration when reporting script errors.

The error control is included as part of the ihave extension so that it is unconditionally available to scripts using ihave.

6.  Security Considerations

A potential security issue with Sieve scripts is that when a script fails to run due to the lack of some extension it may fail to block dangerous email. The ihave extension makes it possible to improve script portability and generality, which may improve the overall security provided by Sieve.

Script robustness aside, ihave is essentially a more flexible variant of Sieve's existing require mechanism. As such, it does not add any additional capabilities to a Sieve implementation that could create security issues. Of course all of the security considerations given in the base Sieve specification and in any extensions that are employed are still relevant.

7.  IANA Considerations

The following template specifies the IANA registration of the Sieve extension specified in this document:

   To: iana@iana.org
   Subject: Registration of new Sieve extension

   Capability name: ihave
   Description:     The "ihave" extension provides a means to write
                    scripts that make use of other extensions only
                    when they are actually available.
   RFC number:      RFC XXXX
   Contact address: Sieve discussion list <ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>

8.  References

8.1. Normative references

8.2. Informative references

Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

Stephan Bosch, Cyrus Daboo, Arnt Gulbrandsen, Andrew McKeon, and Alexey Melnikov provided helpful suggestions and corrections.

Author's Address

Full Copyright Statement

Copyright © The IETF Trust (2008).

This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

This document and the information contained herein are provided on an “AS IS” basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.