Re: [PATCH] Change attachment stamping to use stat st_mtime by default.

On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 09:44:08PM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 03:12:01PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > On 2026-08-21 11:00:58 -0000, Crystal Kolipe via Mutt-dev wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 10:09:27AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > > > (actually, we want to know whether the file contents have changed).
> > > 
> > > Then the correct and portable way to do it is to check file size,
> > > and if that has not changed then check the actual contents.
> > 
> > True. This is what *must* be done. Comparing the contents should be
> > based on a cryptographic hash because the old contents are no longer
> > available.
> > 
> > The current Mutt behavior is buggy (on any platform): replacing
> > an attachment (e.g. with "mv") by an one that isn't more recent
> > is undetected by Mutt, while the goal of the test is to detect
> > a replacement to ensure that the encoding is correct.
> 
> I'm not strongly opposed to doing a hash.  But I think the original intent
> was to protect the user against accidental trip-ups, not to provide a
> fool-proof measure.  The user can just as easily override encoding and types
> if they want to send something incorrect.

What are real-world trip-ups that could happen and that this mechanism
helps against?