Uploaded image for project: 'Jira Service Management Data Center'
  1. Jira Service Management Data Center
  2. JSDSERVER-5214

Provide a configurable option for controlling the behavior of cross commenting in the Service Desk Mail Handler

    • 64
    • 144
    • We collect Jira Service Desk feedback from various sources, and we evaluate what we've collected when planning our product roadmap. To understand how this piece of feedback will be reviewed, see our Implementation of New Features Policy.

      This is related to the fix on cross commenting in https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JSDSERVER-4246

      Some users have expressed that the behavior in 3.2.0 - 3.2.5 is preferred, the reasoning is that if they are sending an email to project A's mailbox, it means they want to have the issue created in project A.

      However, some users have expressed that the behavior in 3.2.6 - 4.17.x is preferred, meaning that is an email is set to Project A's mailbox and contains a reference to an issue from Project B, they want the mail handler to add a comment to the issue from Project B, rather than creating a new issue in Project A.

      There should be an option to allow users to switch between the two behaviors, to better suit their organization's use case.

          Form Name

            [JSDSERVER-5214] Provide a configurable option for controlling the behavior of cross commenting in the Service Desk Mail Handler

            I'm adding my vote to this.

            I'd like to disable cross commenting in my Jira as it can lead to difficult to understand behaviour. A configurable option would do it for me.

            The specific problem I investigated in our instance was the following:

            • Project A has Mail Channel A configured.
            • Project B has no mail channel configured.
            • A user sent a message to Mail Channel A mentioning two issues in the subject: one of project B and one of project A, in this order (it if matters).
            • The message was inserted as a comment in Project B's issue. Not on Project A's.

            Since Project B has no mail channel configured I didn't understood at first how the message could have been added as a comment to one of its issues. It seems to be a cross-posting issue.

            I'd like to disable cross-posting so that this message should be inserted as a comment in the mentioned Project A's issue.

            This problem raised another concern. What happens when a message mentions more than one issue in its subject? Jira will always add it as a comment to the first such issue or to a random one?

            Gustavo Chaves added a comment - I'm adding my vote to this. I'd like to disable cross commenting in my Jira as it can lead to difficult to understand behaviour. A configurable option would do it for me. The specific problem I investigated in our instance was the following: Project A has Mail Channel A configured. Project B has no mail channel configured. A user sent a message to Mail Channel A mentioning two issues in the subject: one of project B and one of project A, in this order (it if matters). The message was inserted as a comment in Project B's issue. Not on Project A's. Since Project B has no mail channel configured I didn't understood at first how the message could have been added as a comment to one of its issues. It seems to be a cross-posting issue. I'd like to disable cross-posting so that this message should be inserted as a comment in the mentioned Project A's issue. This problem raised another concern. What happens when a message mentions more than one issue in its subject? Jira will always add it as a comment to the first such issue or to a random one?

            Adding my vote - we have teams emailing each other with references to their own tickets in subject lines, causing them to get added as a comment on their own tickets instead of creating a new ticket for the other team (meaning work is lost/misplaced).

            Marcus Matos added a comment - Adding my vote - we have teams emailing each other with references to their own tickets in subject lines, causing them to get added as a comment on their own tickets instead of creating a new ticket for the other team (meaning work is lost/misplaced).

            Hello Atlassian Team, also strongly voting for implementing this. We faced severe issues when using Jira Service Desk for field support due to this behavior.

            Patrick Wilhelm added a comment - Hello Atlassian Team, also strongly voting for implementing this. We faced severe issues when using Jira Service Desk for field support due to this behavior.

            Please implement this.

            Mirela Bianu added a comment - Please implement this.

            We need this feature as our customers are financial institutions with very stringent infosec requirements. We experienced a very serious problem because of this. Please add this as soon as possible.

            Chris Pendleton added a comment - We need this feature as our customers are financial institutions with very stringent infosec requirements. We experienced a very serious problem because of this. Please add this as soon as possible.

            Why cross commenting is there? Mail handler of project A should work with project A. There shouldn't be any relation with another project. We have 500+ projects, 3000+ users and this cross commenting is headache for Jira Administrator. And unfortunately we don't have any work around

            Same issue persist with Atlassian Cloud?

            Maitrey Patel added a comment - Why cross commenting is there? Mail handler of project A should work with project A. There shouldn't be any relation with another project. We have 500+ projects, 3000+ users and this cross commenting is headache for Jira Administrator. And unfortunately we don't have any work around Same issue persist with Atlassian Cloud?

            Putting another vote in for this one. It's not just the summary that this affects, it also happens if the in-reply-to header of an email matches the Message-ID of another email that created an issue. In our case an issue was created via email in Project A, and one of the users who also received that email forwarded it to the Project B inbox, but it showed up as a comment on Project A instead. Took us a while to figure out what happened there, it'd be great if we had an option to turn this off so I don't have to convert even more of our JSD inboxes to hacky JEMH workarounds.

            Alex Gallien added a comment - Putting another vote in for this one. It's not just the summary that this affects, it also happens if the in-reply-to header of an email matches the Message-ID of another email that created an issue. In our case an issue was created via email in Project A, and one of the users who also received that email forwarded it to the Project B inbox, but it showed up as a comment on Project A instead. Took us a while to figure out what happened there, it'd be great if we had an option to turn this off so I don't have to convert even more of our JSD inboxes to hacky JEMH workarounds.

            Hi,

            I think this needs to be a feature rather than a suggestions being that we are a very large company with thousands of users and requests incoming. In our specific use case we need to disable cross project commenting. This impacts our daily business as the handler claims success for creating a ticket in project A though it was really a comment in project B.. this is not helpful in our case.

            Let me know when this is a feature.

            Thank you.

            Crystal Cox added a comment - Hi, I think this needs to be a feature rather than a suggestions being that we are a very large company with thousands of users and requests incoming. In our specific use case we need to disable cross project commenting. This impacts our daily business as the handler claims success for creating a ticket in project A though it was really a comment in project B.. this is not helpful in our case. Let me know when this is a feature. Thank you.

            I believe the change implemented in JSDSERVER-4246 has a security and privacy implication:

            If a hacker somehow guesses the project key for another unrelated project and emails a public service desk with a forged email that contains that other project key in the subject - it is most definitely NOT OK to let this comment on that other otherwise hidden and protected project.

            I also have a real life example from our customer (a support organisation themselves) where they are desperately trying to make their JIRA Service Desk to talk to their customer's JIRA Service Desk. If the other JSD were using a key that matches another unrelated project in my JSD, the fact that my email channel ingest just goes and comments on that other project just because the key matches - this would be a major security and privacy problem.

            Ed Letifov [TechTime - New Zealand] added a comment - I believe the change implemented in JSDSERVER-4246 has a security and privacy implication: If a hacker somehow guesses the project key for another unrelated project and emails a public service desk with a forged email that contains that other project key in the subject - it is most definitely NOT OK to let this comment on that other otherwise hidden and protected project. I also have a real life example from our customer (a support organisation themselves) where they are desperately trying to make their JIRA Service Desk to talk to their customer's JIRA Service Desk. If the other JSD were using a key that matches another unrelated project in my JSD, the fact that my email channel ingest just goes and comments on that other project just because the key matches - this would be a major security and privacy problem.

            Kenny Sun added a comment -

            Can you share with us when this function will be available?

            Kenny Sun added a comment - Can you share with us when this function will be available?

              Unassigned Unassigned
              tchai Tzu Hau Chai (Inactive)
              Votes:
              112 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              85 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: