David J. Weller-Fahy wrote:
> After much frustration I discovered why mutt wouldn't work with the
> SMIME keys issued at work: there are two of the private keys (one for
> signature, one for encryption), and a single public key. As I have an
> employer that is more than willing to let me use mutt
After much frustration I discovered why mutt wouldn't work with the
SMIME keys issued at work: there are two of the private keys (one for
signature, one for encryption), and a single public key. As I have an
employer that is more than willing to let me use mutt (if I can get it
to work properly)
I'm cleaning up and looking into committing the multiple crypt hook
patch, but need some feedback from people who use it.
The current behavior (without that patch) is to prompt whether to use
the crypt-hook value if one is found. If the user answers "no" then
Mutt will use the original address fo
* Will Yardley [150403 15:12]:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 03:18:44PM -0700, j...@howey.io wrote:
> > Tim Johnson wrote:
>
> > > See http://www.spamrats.com/lookup.php?ip=64.4.232.191
> > >
> > > Is there something wrong with my headers and if so, how do I correct
> > > it?
>
> > This is related
On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 03:18:44PM -0700, j...@howey.io wrote:
> Tim Johnson wrote:
> > See http://www.spamrats.com/lookup.php?ip=64.4.232.191
> >
> > Is there something wrong with my headers and if so, how do I correct
> > it?
> This is related to the ISP or service provider you are sending yo
Tim Johnson wrote:
> See http://www.spamrats.com/lookup.php?ip=64.4.232.191
>
> Is there something wrong with my headers and if so, how do I correct
> it?
>
> thanks
> --
> Tim
> tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
> http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com
This is rela
See http://www.spamrats.com/lookup.php?ip=64.4.232.191
Is there something wrong with my headers and if so, how do I correct
it?
thanks
--
Tim
tim at tee jay forty nine dot com or akwebsoft dot com
http://www.akwebsoft.com, http://www.tj49.com
