13/21, seems like I am not significantly different from random guessing
Got the same, I can’t believe how many weird comments and extra random things can get added into an email address.
I got 11.
The spaces and quotes caught me.
Let us recite the email validator’s oath:
If it has something before the
, something between theand the., and something after the., it’s valid enough.The ultimate validation is to see if it gets sent.
Fails for when there is no TLD. Just send an email and validate a response eg from a link.
No. The number of users who have a real email with no TLD is far less than the number of users who will accidentally type an email with no TLD if you don’t validate on the front end.
I’m here to help 99.9% of users sign up correctly, not to be completely spec-compliant for the 0.1% who think they’re special.
Guess my mail@IPv6 won’t be accepted because I was too poor to pay for a domain name after having paid for a static IPv6.
nice. though valid but obsolete is not a thing… if it’s obsolete it’s invalid.
Agreed! (because then I would get 3 more points on the test)
Also as the registrant of one of those new fancy TLDs, much like the owner of this website (email.wtf), their own email addresses will fail those stupid email validation checks that only believe in example@example.[com|net|org]
Shitty websites will fail “[email protected]”, guaranteed - despite it being 100% valid AND potentially live.
Source - I have a “.family” domain for my email server. Totally functional, but some shitty websites refuse to believe it.
Yeah I have a .engineering for my biz. I also registered mycompanyengineering.com to get through places that won’t take the new TLDs.
Usually banks.
Seems like a weird choice as the primary TLD.
I’d switch it just to reduce the annoying typing hassle and to avoid misspelling.It’s already unusual if I say “My email is [email protected]”
And that trips so many persons.
First: I have my own domain
Second: It’s not gmail, apple or a local provider
Third: The TLD isnt.deor.combut.eu
I have plenty of website reject even my fairly vanilla [email]+XYZ@ address add–ons
I have a spam collecting address @freemail.hu , the domain is live and working since 96, sometimes it’s not accepted, because it’s not Gmail I guess
Same as I have a .party domain. So I made a place holder (looking at you progressive) email [email protected]
I’m not sure I blame the sites. The spec is so complex that it’s not even possible to know which regex to use
The spec is so complex that it’s not even possible to know which regex to use
Yes. Almost like a regex is not the correct tool to use, and instead they should use a well-tested library function to validate email addresses.
Exactly! But its not obvios. So most of those shitty websites don’t even know they have a problem.
Then there are also people ignoring it on purpose. I once read a reddit comment saying 'well of your address looks like “John wick 🐶❤️”@2001:0db8:85a3:0000:0000:8a2e:0370:7334 I don’t event want your email in my DB because oit will break something
const emailRegExp = /^[\w.!#$%&'*+/=?^`{|}~-]+@[a-z\d-]+(?:\.[a-z\d-]+)*$/i;per the HTML specification. From https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn_web_development/Extensions/Forms/Form_validation#validating_forms_without_a_built-in_api
That’s one very random place to find that. There are a lot of different one and there is no way we all just agree to use that one.
Look art his site that shows a more complete and (in theory) official website. While also explaining that there is no regex that is perfect
(Compete regex for the lazy)
(?:\[a-z0-9!#$%&'\*+/=?^\_\`{|}\~-]+(?:\\.\[a-z0-9!#$%&'\*+/=?^\_\`{|}\~-]+)\*|"(?:\[\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x21\x23-\x5b\x5d-\x7f]|\\\\\[\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x7f])\*")@(?:(?:\[a-z0-9]\(?:\[a-z0-9-]\*\[a-z0-9])?\\.)+\[a-z0-9]\(?:\[a-z0-9-]\*\[a-z0-9])?|\\\[(?:(?:25\[0-5]|2\[0-4]\[0-9]|\[01]?\[0-9]\[0-9]?)\\.){3}(?:25\[0-5]|2\[0-4]\[0-9]|\[01]?\[0-9]\[0-9]?|\[a-z0-9-]\*\[a-z0-9]:(?:\[\x01-\x08\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x1f\x21-\x5a\x53-\x7f]|\\\\\[\x01-\x09\x0b\x0c\x0e-\x7f])+)\\])MDN isn’t a very random place?
No. But it’s on the form validation topic.
I have a feeling, the ones codapine is stating, didn’t even care to half-read the spec and just went with what they knew from experience.
Maybe they didn’t even know there was a spec.
Maybe they asked ChatGPT for the regex.
I scored 16/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.
I feel pretty good about that
I lost it at the fork bomb. I mean I hit valid because there was no way it was on the and not valid, but there’s no way i’d have expected that. after that I just kept guessing the most stupid answer and did pretty well
I scored 14/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.
I actually died at the poop emoji one. Actually amazing awareness to test for that
I vaguely remember a panel where a guy went through various cases like these.
One of the things that stood out is that not every email provides implements the same specs, so one provider might allow you to set up a “valid” email address that might not be able to communicate with other providers as they consider it “invalid”.
I
rage quitgave up at 12.A fork bomb is apparently a valid email address.
I quit, this is stupid.
12/21
are things that are considered out of current spec really “valid” though?
And is it really valid if my email provider doesn’t accept it? If it’s not universally accepted or standard, then it doesn’t matter if it’s technically valid.
The RFC is the standard.
If your email provider doesn’t accept [email protected] is it then invalid?
12/21. It was highly entertaining though.
I scored 18/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.
So much better than I thought it would be! Thank you for making the world a better & more informed place
I scored 13/21 on https://e-mail.wtf/ and all I got was this lousy text to share on social media.
Well… like Bill Clinton said, it depends on what the definition of “is” is.
