On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 15:53 -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote: > On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 15:44 -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 15:00 -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote: > > > Ok all, > > > > > > I'm cross posting this to both Evolution and MailScanner because I can > > > already predict the finger pointing that's naturally going to result. > > > > > > A few months ago, someone brought it to my attention that my GPG > > > signatures (messages signed only, not encrypted) where suddenly turning > > > up "bad". The signature on this message will probably be "bad". It > > > took some major head scratching to figure out what changed, what the > > > parameters where, and what the hell was happening but I think I've got > > > in narrowed down to some poor behavior on the part of BOTH Evolution AND > > > MailScanner (or a component of MailScanner - not sure). > > > > > > It seems to have initially broken with an upgrade to MailScanner. I > > > think upgrading to 4.47.4-2 or there abouts might have been the > > > triggering event, but I don't remember what I was running on that server > > > prior to that. Before then, all my signatures GPG signatures were good. > > > After, they were bad. If I turn off MailScanner on my server, the > > > signatures are good. I have accounts on several servers and the > > > signatures are bad if I forward mail through one running a recent > > > version of MailScanner. I just upgraded one of my servers to 4.50.5-12 > > > and now I've got bad signatures through that server as well (I wasn't > > > running MailScanner on that one before). > > > > > > But, that doesn't get Evolution off the hook. It's only happening for > > > messages that I'm composing in Evolution! If I compose them in Mutt or > > > vi a text file and send it, everything is fine. Also, my saved copies > > > in the Evolution sent box is fine. > > > > > > Sooo... I compare what was saved in the "sent" box with what was > > > received with a bad signature... What was the difference? Carriage > > > Returns! Evolution is terminating lines with CR-LF when composing a > > > message. MailScanner is removing the CR and leaving the LF. > > > Apparently, Evolution called gpg in binary mode to create the signature. > > > Modifying even the line termination then breaks the signature. > > > > > > No other mailer I use generates the DOS/Windows line termination, they > > > all end lines with *NIX convention of LF only (no I haven't tried > > > ThunderBird or KMail or other GUI client as yet). > > > > > > 1) Why must we be adding extraneous CR on text messages? Is this > > > REALLY necessary? > > > > Yes. From rfc3156: > > > > When the OpenPGP digital signature is generated: > > > > (1) The data to be signed MUST first be converted to its content- > > type specific canonical form. For text/plain, this means > > conversion to an appropriate character set and conversion of > > line endings to the canonical <CR><LF> sequence. > > > This is what Evolution does. > > Ok... I'll concede that point. Then what about the signing mode, text > vs binary. We're still broken here.
How so? The only difference between text and binary mode is the canonical CRLF endings, and, guess what, Evolution converts to CRLF. So no problem there. > > > -- > > Jeffrey Stedfast > > Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com > > Mike -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.novell.com _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
