This string passes as an exact match: '<[email protected]>'

[smvilar]

emailRegex({exact:true}).test('<[email protected]>') // true :(

[SamVerschueren]

This library seems quite loose in terms of matching email patterns, is that correct? As I can see in the tests that !#$%&*+/=?^{|}[email protected] for example is an exact match. So if special characters like that are allowed but <[email protected]> isn't, what about the following situations

• <[email protected]
• [email protected]>
• foo<[email protected]
• <foo>@bar.com

Just so I can expand the test cases and make sure the correct situations are covered.

[gabooh]

I have the same issue, many false positive are found.

[vaticancameo]

matching against '[email protected], some text' will return '[email protected],' with the comma

[gtwilliams03]

I would like to use this module in my app - but I am finding that it returns some inconsistent results. Assuming this gist is a proper list of valid and invalid emails for testing: https://gist.github.com/cjaoude/fd9910626629b53c4d25

It does not seem to match correctly. The link above has 37 email addresses to test with - 17 are valid, 20 are invalid. Testing with this package results in 35 valid email addresses when I think it should only return 20.

It matches the following emails correctly:

• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• email@[123.123.123.123]
• "email"@example.com
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• [email protected]
• very.unusual.”@”.unusual.com

It properly ignored these emails:

• plainaddress
• @example.com
• email.example.com
• [email protected]

It errored on the following ones:

• much.”more\ unusual”@example.com (only matched unusual”@example.com)
• very.”(),:;<>[]”.VERY.”very@\ "very”[email protected] (only matched ;<>[]”.VERY.”very@\
• "very”[email protected])
• #@%^%#$@#$@#.com (matched twice in error: #@%^%#$ and #$@#.com)
• Joe Smith [email protected] (instead matched [email protected])
• email@[email protected] (instead matched )
• [email protected] (instead matched )
• [email protected] (instead matched )
• [email protected] (matched as valid)
• あいうえお@example.com (matched as valid)
• [email protected] (Joe Smith) (instead matched [email protected])
• email@example (matched as valid)
• [email protected] (matched as valid)
• [email protected] (instead matched )
• [email protected] (matched as valid)
• [email protected] (matched as valid)
• ”(),:;<>[]@example.com (matched as valid)
• just”not”[email protected] (matched as valid)
• this\ is"really"not\[email protected] (matched as valid)

[lxsmnsyc]

I know that this is issue may be old but according to the RFC-822 on the Address Specification, the regex behaves correctly with the given test, that is because email addresses are not only limited to the format [email protected], but also someName<[email protected]>, so this issue is not really an issue.

[wmik]

This is definitely an issue/bug.

emailRegex().test('f@il') // => true

Version 3.0.0

[sindresorhus]

@wmik Emails are not required to have a domain. You can find domain-less email on company intranets. We could add an option to require this however, as I agree it's not useful to allow domain-less emails for public services.

[hmelenok]

Please check, my regExp(https://regex101.com/r/YrpDBq/7) maybe it will help, only thing is left company emails

[niftylettuce]

I have published https://github.com/niftylettuce/email-regex-safe as an alternative to this package, with a lot of configurable options. PR's welcome.

[babaralishah]

Hi
I am on Angular

And using the below regex:

'^[a-z0-9]+([._-]?[a-z0-9]+)+@[a-z0-9]+([._-]?[a-z0-9]+)+\\.[a-z]{2,3}$'

But its not fulfilling my requirement, my requirement is below:

saa5@me-d_d_u.co

please anyone tell me, why this regex is not working for my above mentioned case.

Regards
Babar Ali Shah