Bug 1506587 Comment 35 Edit History

Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.

I don't think this is right. This bug is about "white-space" spoofing, not removing a whole range of Unicode characters and potentially obliterating message subjects.

I see no reason to remove most of the Mn class, https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/Mn/list.htm, and I'd also be more careful with the Cf class, https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/Cf/list.htm. There are a lot of printable characters or some that add "adjustments" to following characters. "they should be super unusual in practice" is completely unfounded. Please prove that you're not obliterating Arabic writing or anything that uses stuff from \u0300-\u036F.

BTW, you can find a use of ؄ here: https://archive.urdu.siasat.com/news/%D8%AD%D8%B6%D8%B1%D8%AA-%D8%B9%D9%84%DB%8C-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B6%DB%8C%D9%B0-%D8%84-%DA%A9%DB%8C-%D8%AC%D8%A7%DA%BA-%D9%86%D8%AB%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C-730082/ - Search for the character on the page.
I don't think this is right. This bug is about "white-space" spoofing, not removing a whole range of Unicode characters and potentially obliterating message subjects.

I see no reason to remove most of the Mn class, https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/Mn/list.htm, and I'd also be more careful with the Cf class, https://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/Cf/list.htm. There are a lot of printable characters or some that add "adjustments" to following characters. "they should be super unusual in practice" is completely unfounded. Please prove that you're not obliterating Arabic writing or anything that uses stuff from \u0300-\u036F.

BTW, you can find a use of ؄ (U+0604 ARABIC SIGN SAMVAT) here: https://archive.urdu.siasat.com/news/%D8%AD%D8%B6%D8%B1%D8%AA-%D8%B9%D9%84%DB%8C-%D9%85%D8%B1%D8%AA%D8%B6%DB%8C%D9%B0-%D8%84-%DA%A9%DB%8C-%D8%AC%D8%A7%DA%BA-%D9%86%D8%AB%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C-730082/ - Search for the character on the page.

Back to Bug 1506587 Comment 35