mails from HP Laserjet Scan dated 01/01/1970 (solved)

S_Paternotte

Issue reported as VB-104004 on 14/2/2024
I'd be interested to learn about the status.

Steps to reproduce:
Setup a HP Color Laserjet to send scanned documents via email
Scan a document and have it sent by email
Notice that the particular email does not show up in Vivaldi Mail
This is because the message is interpreted as having a date 01/01/1970 and thus is showing all the way down at the bottom of the inbox

Expected behaviour:
The date of the mail IS today. The mail should be shown at the top of the inbox

Actual behaviour:
Vivaldi Mail somehow interprets the message is being from 01/01/1970 and sorts it all the way at the bottom.

The header of the email message contains the following warning:

X-ACL-Warn: Adding Message-ID header because it is missing!

which obviously points towards an omission in the message produced by the HP Laserjet.

But isn't it possible for Vivaldi Mail to catch this odd circumstance and list such email messages at todays date?

Edit 20/6/2024: (solved)

mib2berlin

@S_Paternotte
Hi, it was marked as duplicate of
VB-95775
Use current time instead of 1970 for mails without received dates
This was fixed at 14/Mar/24 but I don't know if this was published in stable. You have to check the change logs.
Please ask in the bug status thread, not all read in the mail section:

https://forum.vivaldi.net/topic/27450/what-is-the-status-of-vb-already-reported-bug-issue/

Cheers, mib

mib2berlin

@S_Paternotte
Hi, as I mentioned, you have to check the change logs. Only the Vivaldi team knows this.
I cant discuss this in the status thread.
https://vivaldi.com/blog/desktop/

yojimbo274064400

@S_Paternotte,

I am curious to know if when you view the email's source text (press Ctrl + U) does it contain a Date: header? For example

⋮
Date:  Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0000
⋮

derDay

@mib2berlin said:

it was marked as duplicate of
VB-95775
Use current time instead of 1970 for mails without received dates
This was fixed at 14/Mar/24 but I don't know if this was published in stable.

is this bug connected to VB-85008 wrong date from feeds ? same bug but for feeds. this isn't definitely not squashed at the actual snapshot

S_Paternotte

Thanks for all the additional info.
It looks like something was done, but somehow didn't make it in stable yet.

I've sent an additional info message to the VB confirmation I had received back in February. Hopefully something will come out of this.

Hadden89

@mib2berlin said in mails from HP Laserjet Scan dated 01/01/1970:

You have to check the change logs

But not very easy, because blog posts are often not very well indexed and we have:

https://vivaldi.com/blog/desktop/releases/ (for stable release)
https://vivaldi.com/blog/desktop/updates/ (for stable minor updates)
https://vivaldi.com/blog/desktop/snapshots/ (for snapshots)

@derDay Likely. After all, feeds are very similar to mails.

mib2berlin

@Hadden89
Yes, I have sometimes go through 6 minor updates block posts to check and there is no versions number in the block posts.
Which version was update 3?
I will ask in the developer chat if it is possible to get a list, I hope the developer know which fix was in which update.

Hadden89

@mib2berlin said in mails from HP Laserjet Scan dated 01/01/1970:

Which version was update 3?

If you mean snap, should be (6.7).3319.12 ... ~~also I'm not sure stable changelogs cover minor updates~~ They don't.

S_Paternotte

@yojimbo274064400

No Date :
No Messsage-ID

The message coming from the HP Laserjet is definitely lacking important parts. Yet, Vivaldi Mail is the first mail client solving this by interpreting this as 01/01/1970 and thereby listing the message out of sight at the far bottom of a looooong inbox.
(And I have little faith in HP picking this up. I am SO sorry having purchased a HP Laserjet.)

Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: from mail.contoso.org
	by mail.contoso.org with LMTP
	id mAXnFgDwG2Y8zQoAGJQwQg
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	for <[email protected]>; Sun, 14 Apr 2024 17:02:24 +0200
Return-path: <[email protected]>
Envelope-to: [email protected]
Delivery-date: Sun, 14 Apr 2024 17:02:24 +0200
Received: from spamrelay.contoso.org ([185.104.28.12]:40368 helo=mail-slave.contoso.org)
	by mail.contoso.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.95)
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	id 1rw1N5-002yzr-Ib
	for [email protected];
	Sun, 14 Apr 2024 17:02:24 +0200
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Scan van HP Color Laserjet M283fdw
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="__MIME_Section_Boundary__"
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
X-ACL-Warn: Adding Message-ID header because it is missing!

This is a multi-part messsage in MIME format.

Hadden89

@S_Paternotte What other clients do with a similar malformed email?
I think they just put the date of the day in which is seen by the client instead of vivaldi which gives them a unix time zero date :3

S_Paternotte

@Hadden89 Vivaldi mail is the only mail client that I know of that turns these into a date 1/1/1970 all other clients default to the Date/time received.

Outlook
Thunderbird
Outlook.com (WPA)
Windows Maill app on Windows or Android
K-9 Mail on Android

Hadden89

@S_Paternotte yeah, is the more logical thing to do

jafaro

Hello,
I have the same problem, both in the stable version and with the latest SnapShot.
The plain text message header looks something like this:

Return-Path: <[email protected]>
X-Spam-Virus: No
X-Spam-Checker-Version: DD-AntiSpam
X-Spam-Status: No (0.2/5.0)
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: from mail-ha-01.scip.local ([172.21.33.147])
	by mail-node-imap-mpo10-00.scip.local with LMTP
	id WIH5J9hQ82X7NBUALGWQ0w:P1
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	for <[email protected]>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:32:40 +0100
Received: from mail-node.dondominio.com ([172.21.33.147])
	by mail-ha-01.scip.local with LMTP
	id WIH5J9hQ82X7NBUALGWQ0w
	(envelope-from <[email protected]>)
	for <[email protected]>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:32:40 +0100
Received: from xxxxpredxp.xxxx.es (xxxxpredxp.xxxx.es [212.163.31.62])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail-node.dondominio.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6961940078
	for <[email protected]>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:32:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from app-w1 (app-w1.net.als [172.16.226.8])
	by xxxxpredxp.xxxx.es (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AEC441CE4ADD
	for <[email protected]>; Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:32:34 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 xxxxpredxp.xxxx.es AEC441CE4ADD
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xxxx.es;
	s=andrewrw60208; t=1710444754;
	bh=+B5EVhFj+X9MadKEW+wjsUtaDPPAK1XZJq50qdIC0E8=;
	h=From:To:Subject:From;
	b=PW3UhQXDL1+gZL0lLCxhdz0HrKzHlTlWJcg8W0GnxixOyHppXkDpDb8W0OQCeT8ec
	 Qr7w/qLoBl+NhOJ0hW6r94RYLCCgTFesFdWE4iKFlPO+M2kVcGu45WSLRZ3vwL1UQr
	 7YUpUsW7S2+7MWGNmKx0RhlAnvFznhidweNL1YAs=
Message-ID: <1348096090.1710444754717.JavaMail.root@app-w1>
From: XXXX Web <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Gracias por comprar en Xxxx
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_43168_571613714.1710444754698"
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.2 (mail-node.dondominio.com [0.0.0.0]); Thu, 14 Mar 2024 20:32:40 +0100 (CET)

------=_Part_43168_571613714.1710444754698
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

And the result presented in the message list is:

Thanks for your assistance.

yojimbo274064400

@S_Paternotte said in mails from HP Laserjet Scan dated 01/01/1970:

@Hadden89 Vivaldi mail is the only mail client that I know of that turns these into a date 1/1/1970 all other clients default to the Date/time received.

Outlook

Thunderbird

Outlook.com (WPA)

Windows Maill app on Windows or Android

K-9 Mail on Android

In Thunderbird this time and date information is not static and when such messages are moved it changes to the current time and date.

Have not tested other email clients mentioned but would not be surprised to see them doing the same.

S_Paternotte

I can confirm that this issue is no longer present in 6.8.3381.44 (Stable channel) (64-bits)

SOLVED

DoctorG

@S_Paternotte Good