Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[MailKitSender] Per client ServerCertificateValidationCallback #338

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Whivel
Copy link

@Whivel Whivel commented Aug 16, 2022

[FluentEmail.MailKit]
I added a new option in SmtpClientOptions to give the opportunity to specify a ServerCertificateValidationCallback per client.
If specified the callback is assigned to the MailKit SmtpClient and it will be used instead of the default one. In that way it is possible to avoid the use of the global variable "ServicePointManager.ServerCertificateValidationCallback"

@Whivel
Copy link
Author

Whivel commented Aug 16, 2022

duplicate #333

@aravindk777
Copy link

There are two possible dupes/similar implementations: #333 and #256. Are we going to keep this or has any additional abilities compared to other two? so we can review the most beneficial PR?

@Whivel
Copy link
Author

Whivel commented Mar 24, 2024

in #256 and in #333 they both forgot to add the same features to the SendAsync method. Both prs pass and use CheckCertificateRevocation which is not in this pr.

in #333 the callback method is not passed.

I think #256 and #333 cannot be merged because they are incomplete because they miss the same change in the async method and.
#338 (this) could be merged but i think CheckCertificateRevocation should be added (in this or with another pr)

@aravindk777
Copy link

in #256 and in #333 they both forgot to add the same features to the SendAsync method. Both prs pass and use CheckCertificateRevocation which is not in this pr.

in #333 the callback method is not passed.

I think #256 and #333 cannot be merged because they are incomplete because they miss the same change in the async method and. #338 (this) could be merged but i think CheckCertificateRevocation should be added (in this or with another pr)

So, @Whivel - do you want to add that CheckCertificateRevocation in to this PR and then we can review and merge? Or do you intend to do that as separate PR?

Copy link

@aravindk777 aravindk777 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants