On 06/13/2022 6:24 PM John Stoffel <john@stoffel.org> wrote:

 

 

>>>>> "Aki" == Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi@open-xchange.com> writes:

 

Will 2.3.20 be released ASAP with this fix?

 

Aki> This has now been fixed in main with

Aki> https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/2780f106e3b185981dd7aaf5cbf2e88daa2f7c64.patch

 

Aki> Aki

 

>> On 13/06/2022 10:43 gravitini <dovecot@gravitini.com> wrote:

>>

>>

>> Please consider as critical (data loss) and recommend a warning is

>> issued for 2.3.19 users.

>>

>>

>> On 13/06/22 5:25 pm, Aki Tuomi wrote:

>> >> On 13/06/2022 02:09 gravitini <dovecot@gravitini.com> wrote:

>> >>

>> >>

>> >> Replying to: https://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/2022-May/124816.html

>> >>

>> >>

>> >> Hi,

>> >>

>> >> Looking at the code (and tested via local build from source) it looks

>> >> like doveadm deduplicate in 2.3.19 can cause significant data loss.

>> >>

>> >> A 2022-02-11 commit removed key duplication resulting in undefined

>> >> behaviour which is often truncation of a mailbox to 67 entries.

>> >> (HASH_TABLE_MIN_SIZE)

>> >>

>> >> https://github.com/dovecot/core/commit/320844f50cd669b602d30210e2e5216f65d2050f?diff=split#diff-5842cf9d4248dc515d80ebb45575341b7d76832f979a8ac5f602784cb5b03f2cL121

>> >>

>> >> diff --git a/src/doveadm/doveadm-mail-deduplicate.c

>> >> b/src/doveadm/doveadm-mail-deduplicate.c

>> >>

>> >> index caec758112..2152482876 100644

>> >> --- a/src/doveadm/doveadm-mail-deduplicate.c

>> >> +++ b/src/doveadm/doveadm-mail-deduplicate.c

>> >> @@ -63,8 +63,10 @@ cmd_deduplicate_box(struct doveadm_mail_cmd_context

>> >> *_ctx,

>> >>                 if (key != NULL && *key != '\0') {

>> >>                         if (hash_table_lookup(hash, key) != NULL)

>> >>                                 mail_expunge(mail);

>> >> -                       else

>> >> +                       else {

>> >> +                               key = p_strdup(pool, key);

>> >>                                 hash_table_insert(hash, key,

>> >> POINTER_CAST(1));

>> >> +                       }

>> >>                 }

>> >>         }

>> > Thank you both for the report, we'll look into this!

>> >

>> > Aki