Queued Queuedington wrote: > > Is the "correct" thing to do, perhaps, converting everything to utf8 > that's received in a different character set? > Charset conversions are costly. Some converters have special function dependencies or very large mapping tables. In this case application only needs to sanitize three symbols. Correct fix is to update every htmlspecialchars function call to less picky iso-8859-1 htmlspecialchars version. Application is dealing with external inputs and these inputs can contain anything. 5.4 htmlspecialchars function is fubared. It is supposed to return sanitized text, but it freaks out any non critical format error. Any normal text viewer would follow utf-8 specs and display unknown symbol instead of those broken byte sequences. -- Tomas -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Blank-message-body-on-some-replies-tp34348279p34374609.html Sent from the squirrelmail-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ ----- squirrelmail-users mailing list Posting guidelines: http://squirrelmail.org/postingguidelines List address: squirrelmail-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx List archives: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.squirrelmail.user List info (subscribe/unsubscribe/change options): https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/squirrelmail-users
