> >TBH this looks more like a gpg than a mutt problem, and I haven't
> >figured out how to debug this. Same error for encrypting.
>
> Yes, it sounds like something changed with either the GPGME version, or
> perhaps a configuration file. I can't offer much advice except to check
> those thin
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 12:36:53PM +0100, isdtor wrote:
My S/MIME setup has died one from day to the next and I cannot find out why.
Symptom: trying to send e.g. signed email, the result is
error signing data: No CRL known?
This an error coming back from GPGME when trying to perform the sign
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 10:52:46PM +0100, Andy Spiegl wrote:
> No mess at all. :-)
>
> see attached pic
>
> Andy
Cheers Andy!
Pete.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
No mess at all. :-)
see attached pic
Andy
--
Now I know what a statesman is; he's a dead politician. We need more statesmen.
(Bob Edwards)
On Monday 06 Jan 2014 12:22:49 Heiko Heil wrote:
> Hello Mick,
>
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 08:34:52PM +, Mick wrote:
> >> I found the description of those fields in smime.c:
> >> /* 0=email 1=name 2=nick 3=intermediate 4=trust */ (line 397)
> >> Just wondering why "smime_keys add_p12" didn't i
Hello Mick,
On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 08:34:52PM +, Mick wrote:
I found the description of those fields in smime.c:
/* 0=email 1=name 2=nick 3=intermediate 4=trust */ (line 397)
Just wondering why "smime_keys add_p12" didn't insert the
intermediate certificate ("?").
Could it be that the in
On Sunday 05 Jan 2014 19:10:42 Heiko Heil wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 04:25:39PM +0100, Heiko Heil wrote:
> > [...]
> > first.l...@domain.com 1a2b3c4d.0 me ? t
> > ^ email ^ key ^ label
> >
> >...but what about the last 2? I didn't find any information in the
> >manuals.
>
On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 04:25:39PM +0100, Heiko Heil wrote:
[...]
first.l...@domain.com 1a2b3c4d.0 me ? t
^ email ^ key ^ label
...but what about the last 2? I didn't find any information in the
manuals.
I found the description of those fields in smime.c:
/* 0=email 1=name
2013/3/6 Andre Klärner :
> Hi Kunszt,
>
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 09:05:06AM +0100, Kunszt Árpád wrote:
>> When I'm using the interactive user-interface everything works fine,
>> but from the command line it doesn't work. I tried a lot of things,
>> googled half of the day, but I didn't found any w
Hi Kunszt,
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 09:05:06AM +0100, Kunszt Árpád wrote:
> When I'm using the interactive user-interface everything works fine,
> but from the command line it doesn't work. I tried a lot of things,
> googled half of the day, but I didn't found any working solution.
>
> Is it possi
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 05:37:50PM -0500, Dave Dodge wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:21:49PM +0100, P. Mazart wrote:
> > Stas Verberkt schrieb am 17.11.2011 14:43:46:
> > > Nevertheless, disabling the "clear text" mode is not really an option,
> > > as this would render all my e-mails unreadabl
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:21:49PM +0100, P. Mazart wrote:
> Stas Verberkt schrieb am 17.11.2011 14:43:46:
> > Nevertheless, disabling the "clear text" mode is not really an option,
> > as this would render all my e-mails unreadable by those using older
> > e-mailclients or e-mailclients on smartph
Hi,
Stas Verberkt schrieb am 17.11.2011 14:43:46:
> Nevertheless, disabling the "clear text" mode is not really an option,
> as this would render all my e-mails unreadable by those using older
> e-mailclients or e-mailclients on smartphones.
Actually we might not have an idea, what “clear text” m
Quoting Omen Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, Sep 25 10:37:
>
> I'll look into this. If that's the cause, then the problem is between
> my keyboard and chair, not yours. ;-)
For anyone following this, the problem was indeed on my end. I have an
updated patch, available from
http://descolada.da
Quoting Ren? Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, Sep 25 15:01:
>
> Typically PEBCAK. The segfault was a result of not setting this
> variable. Strange side-effect, of course, but it works now!
I'll look into this. If that's the cause, then the problem is between
my keyboard and chair, not yours.
* René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 14:47]:
> * René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 14:25]:
>
> > * René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 10:30]:
> >
> > > This patch makes mutt segfault right after sending the e-mail. Despite
> > > of this, it works: both recipient and I a
* René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 14:25]:
> * René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 10:30]:
>
> > This patch makes mutt segfault right after sending the e-mail. Despite
> > of this, it works: both recipient and I are able to decrypt and read
> > the message.
> >
> > A clue, anyo
* René Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [25-09-2002 10:30]:
> This patch makes mutt segfault right after sending the e-mail. Despite
> of this, it works: both recipient and I are able to decrypt and read
> the message.
>
> A clue, anyone?
Let me be more specific: like I've already mailed Omen, I appli
* Omen Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [24-09-2002 21:24]:
> Quoting Ren? Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, Sep 24 19:08:
> >
> > I'm looking for the S/MIME equivalent of the GnuPG option:
> >
> > encrypt-to
>
> As far as I could tell, it doesn't exist. This patch add that
> functionality. Set $smi
Quoting Ren? Clerc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, Sep 24 19:08:
>
> I'm looking for the S/MIME equivalent of the GnuPG option:
>
> encrypt-to
As far as I could tell, it doesn't exist. This patch add that
functionality. Set $smime_encrypt_self to true and S/MIME encrypted
messages you send will a
You are right. If you look at smime.c you will see that Mutt desperatly
needs either smime-type or (to satisfy Netscape 4.x mailers) a
Content-Description.
As s/mime is in development, we all have to wait or find some
workarounds for it. See my mail from 18-09-02 for my current solution.
I'm sur
* Timo T. Rajala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One difference is that the "smime-type=enveloped-data;" row is missing
> from the MS mail. I inserted this row in the MS mail and opened the
> mail in mutt: now both signature check and decrypt works.
>
> My question is: Is the MS MUA not following t
Hi,
* Mike Schiraldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-04-15 15:55]:
>> That doesn't sound as if you were a friend of these. Since I saw a few
>> using S/MIME in this list, what might have been their reason? Is
>> S/MIME better established with non-free software?
>We had a discussion in February about this
Hi,
* Mike Schiraldi [04/15/02 15:55:22 CEST] wrote:
[ interesting points ]
Good points, thanks for mentioning.
But in my opinion current problems/difficulties with PGP only
affect people currently using it. So the concept of a web of
trust and the resulting problems only motivate people
curre
> That doesn't sound as if you were a friend of these. Since I saw a few
> using S/MIME in this list, what might have been their reason? Is
> S/MIME better established with non-free software?
We had a discussion in February about this. Check out Jeremy's excellent
posts:
http://marc.theaimsgroup
begin Thorsten Haude quotation:
>
> using S/MIME in this list, what might have been their reason? Is
> S/MIME better established with non-free software?
Exactly.
--
Shawn McMahon| McMahon's Laws of Linux support:
http://www.eiv.com | 1) There's more than one
Hi,
* Will Yardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-04-14 23:44]:
>s/mime sigs usually include the key itself along with the signature
>(which is why s/mime signed mails are so rediculously large).
That doesn't sound as if you were a friend of these. Since I saw a few
using S/MIME in this list, what might
Thorsten Haude wrote:
> Yes, that gives a nice introduction and good pointers to technical
> documents (which I may need if I ever get around to get my filter
> really aware of the different formats).
> I would still like to read something about the key infrastructure.
> Example: If I get a mail
Hi,
* Rocco Rutte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [02-04-14 22:56]:
>* Thorsten Haude [04/13/02 10:41:21 CEST] wrote:
>> I want to get a better picture about S/MIME, but can't find an
>> introduction in the net. Could one of you point me to a S/MIME
>> introduction or tutorial that is written for the user?
>
Hi,
* Thorsten Haude [04/13/02 10:41:21 CEST] wrote:
> I want to get a better picture about S/MIME, but can't find an
> introduction in the net. Could one of you point me to a S/MIME
> introduction or tutorial that is written for the user?
The "Linux Security HowTo" just points to one of Netscap
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 11:52:49AM +, Luke Ross wrote:
> How about a red line in the status bar? Would be most elegent surely?
that's what mutt_error does.
> I'm still on old S/MIME mutt, and I saw:
[ ... something ... ]
> What was the reason behind changing it? No screen corruption here.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 11:24:56AM -0500, David Collantes wrote:
> What about only the sleep? The continue garbles my screen here, for some
> reason. I just patched with your diff, which got some rejection, btw. I
> would make it sleep for, lets say, 3 seconds and then to the mutt_error().
i thin
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:20:33PM +0100, Oliver Ehli wrote:
> alternatively, we could just printf() the first (ie _not_ use
> mutt_error), wait for any_key, and then mutt_error() the second/final
> warning.
What about only the sleep? The continue garbles my screen here, for some
reason. I just
On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 12:20:33PM +0100, Oliver Ehli wrote:
> > A warning should absolutely be displayed, but should
> > mutt_any_key_to_continue() be called? A previous bugfix in another part of
> > smime.c mentioned that this is bad, and it added a sleep(5) call whose
> > purpose i didn't unde
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:24:27PM -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> Looks like we've got a display-corruption bug in current CVS -- when a
> message arrives whose "From" address doesn't match any in the S/MIME cert
> (like this message), the screen gets garbled.
>
> A warning should absolutely
On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 02:24:27PM -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> Looks like we've got a display-corruption bug in current CVS -- when a
> message arrives whose "From" address doesn't match any in the S/MIME cert
> (like this message), the screen gets garbled.
>
> A warning should absolutely be d
Something else you can try -- rename your ~/.smime and reinitialize it, so
that it is completely empty. Then, send your mutt account a signed message
from your Outlook account. Extract the S/MIME sig from it, and then reply to
it, with encryption turned on. See if Outlook can decrypt -that-.
--
Sorry if this seems like a "did you check the power cord" answer, but you
mention that you have two certificates. Are you positive that the one you
are encrypting to is the one which is installed in Outlook?
--
Mike Schiraldi
VeriSign Applied Research
msg24705/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP s
On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 10:45:51AM -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> > Does anyone knows where could I find a s/mime howto? I just got 1.5.0i and
> > I want to try the s/mime support, but nothing comes with it to set it up.
> > How to create my certificate/key? How can I make it(them) 'legal' for th
> Does anyone knows where could I find a s/mime howto? I just got 1.5.0i and
> I want to try the s/mime support, but nothing comes with it to set it up.
> How to create my certificate/key? How can I make it(them) 'legal' for the
> top CA? Any help highly appreciated.
See doc/smime-notes.txt and c
Will Yardley wrote:
>
> you need to get one - thawte has free ones, or you can buy one from
> verisign.
to clarify... i'm sure you _could_ make your own using ssl... however
it's probably a good idea to get one from a root CA if you want the
certs to not spit out warnings of the sort that self s
David Collantes wrote:
> Does anyone knows where could I find a s/mime howto? I just got 1.5.0i
> and I want to try the s/mime support, but nothing comes with it to set
> it up.
check smime.rc in contrib/, check this site:
http://www.kfu.com/~nsayer/encryption/openssl.html
> How to create my ce
Jeremy Blosser wrote:
>
> a) live in a world where no one has locks on their doors, except for
> the very few people that know how to build their own lock from scratch
> and check it every morning for any scratches to indicate someone tried
> to break in, and the robbers just skip those and go ro
On Feb 02, Stephan Seitz [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 03:36:13PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote
> > Neither of these are necessarily true. HTTPS is a good example.
> > Most ebay and amazon users have no idea of any of the technical
> > issues involved with using SSL, but beca
Hi!
On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 03:36:13PM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote
> Neither of these are necessarily true. HTTPS is a good example.
> Most ebay and amazon users have no idea of any of the technical
> issues involved with using SSL, but because they use it anyway,
> their communication is more s
Jeremy Blosser wrote:
>
> Neither of these are necessarily true. HTTPS is a good example. Most
> ebay and amazon users have no idea of any of the technical issues
> involved with using SSL, but because they use it anyway, their
> communication is more secure than it would be without it. And be
On Feb 01, Mike Schiraldi [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> [2] I guess this is where we disagree - you seem to think that there is
> little overlap between "the set of people who care about email security"
> and "the set of people who good mailers" .. i think there is a lot.
No, I think that
On Feb 01, Will Yardley [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> yeah i think the issue is not so much of technical sophistication
> (although that's an issue too) as of the fact that most people Don't
> Care.
>
> 99% of the people i correspond with simply don't care, so i generally
> don't bother to encrypt
Thomas Roessler wrote:
>
> I'm right now trying this:
>
> send-hook ~A "set smime_sign_command=\"openssl smime
> -sign -signer %c -inkey %k -passin stdin -in %f -certfile %i -outform DER\""
> send-hook ~l "set smime_sign_command=\"openssl smime
> -sign -signer
> The people you are likely to coorespond with that wouldn't be able to take
> advantage of it would also likely not need to, either because they didn't
> know enough to care. [...] Thus you could continue to communicate with all
> people the way you want, without imposing unneccessary expectation
On 2002-02-01 14:32:20 -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
>I could attach just a signature and leave out the certs when
>sending to certain mailing lists (using a hook to change
>smime_sign_command to toggle OpenSSL's "--nocerts" switch).
>However, this only decreases the smime.p7s size (after base6
Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> On Feb 01, Mike Schiraldi [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > Part of the problem with PGP is that only "people that know enough
> > to care" use it. My goal is to be able to communicate securely and
> > privately with everyone -- even Outlook and Netscape users.
>
> The peopl
On Feb 01, Mike Schiraldi [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > It would only work among mailers that knew how to use it, but many people
> > that know enough to care about this are going to be using a decent mailer.
>
> Part of the problem with PGP is that only "people that know enough to care"
> use i
> It would only work among mailers that knew how to use it, but many people
> that know enough to care about this are going to be using a decent mailer.
Part of the problem with PGP is that only "people that know enough to care"
use it. My goal is to be able to communicate securely and privately
On Feb 01, Mike Schiraldi [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > To me the ideal solution to the bandwidth issue would be a system that
> > allowed you to send the whole key with the sig to certain people, and let
> > people request it from key servers in other cases (mailing lists).
>
> I could attach j
> Mike and I were discussing this in private mail earlier this week... I'm
> sure he'll have his own things to add, but after talking with him this is
> my take on it:
That was a pretty good summary. If anyone wants to know more, feel free to
ask me off-list.
> To me the ideal solution to the ba
On Feb 01, Volker Moell [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> >
> [...]
>
> Just a question: Is it really necessary to attach at each message the
> smime.p7s file (your signature or so)? It has always about the 10th size
> of your underlying posting, so it increases the size of you
Mike Schiraldi wrote:
>
[...]
Just a question: Is it really necessary to attach at each message the
smime.p7s file (your signature or so)? It has always about the 10th size
of your underlying posting, so it increases the size of your posting way
much.
What is it for at all? Why is this (I think)
Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> > presumably the private key should be 0600, and maybe the directory
> > 0700?
>
> The directory should be 0700 -- did you use the script's "init"
> command, or make the directories yourself? If you used "init" and it's
> not 0700, let me know.
yeah i created the directo
> presumably the private key should be 0600, and maybe the directory 0700?
The directory should be 0700 -- did you use the script's "init" command, or
make the directories yourself? If you used "init" and it's not 0700, let me
know.
Just to be safe, i just sent Thomas a patch which sets umask 07
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Brian Clark wrote:
> * Knute ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 28. 2002 16:26]:
> [...]
> > When I do a dpkg -S mutt.ncurses it was the mutt-utf8 package that
> > created it. Since that is the one that is linked to slang.
> OK, here's what I get:
> (~)% dpkg -S mutt.ncurses
> dpk
* Knute ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 28. 2002 16:26]:
[...]
> The name is mutt.ncurses, and I didn't have do dl anything extra to
> have it on here. Don't actually know where it came from to be honest
> with you. I do have both slang and ncurses on my machine. And I am
> using unstable as well. And
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Brian Clark wrote:
> * Knute ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 28. 2002 11:04]:
> > I'm currently using debian, so I don't know about other distros. What
> > I've found is that with debian, there is mutt (linked with slang),
> > and mutt.curses (linked with ncurses). As I use kbd sh
* Knute ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Jan 28. 2002 11:04]:
> I'm currently using debian, so I don't know about other distros. What
> I've found is that with debian, there is mutt (linked with slang),
> and mutt.curses (linked with ncurses). As I use kbd shortcuts anyway,
> I simply set up a shortcut to mu
On Mon, 28 Jan 2002, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> > I know nothing about Ncurses, not even how to see it's version, but
> > tried to link with it: The indicator seems to react well. It takes the
> > reversed colors the current index line should be. But, for an unrelated
> > to your patch reason, t
> I know nothing about Ncurses, not even how to see it's version, but
> tried to link with it: The indicator seems to react well. It takes the
> reversed colors the current index line should be. But, for an unrelated
> to your patch reason, the color scheme of all the screen is messed up:
> in
> This context colored indicator patch seems to have no effect when
> Mutt (versions 1.2.5 and 1.3.27) is linked with slang (version 1.4.4).
Yow! I'll take a look and post my findings.
--
Mike Schiraldi
VeriSign Applied Research
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
[followups set to users list only]
Hello Mike,
On Friday, January 18, 2002 at 2:34:51 PM -0500, Mike Schiraldi wrote:
> indicator.patch changes the behavior of the indicator bar when it is
> defined as "mono indicator reverse" (the default). [...] With this
> patch, the indicator bar, when
The S/MIME patch i posted for 1.3.26 also works with 1.3.27.
--
Mike Schiraldi
VeriSign Applied Research
smime.p7s
Description: application/pkcs7-signature
[18.01.02 14:34 -0500] Mike Schiraldi <-- :
> Attached is a version of the S/MIME patch that will work with
> mutt-1.3.26. (Or at least it appears to work -- let me know if you have any
> problems)
Yes, I have dam.. fu... problems with it !!!
Did you ever hear that you do not post thousands
Works well for me. The patches didn't apply without some offsets, but
they all applied with no rejs.
Thanks,
pete
On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Schiraldi, Mike wrote:
> Attached is a version of the S/MIME patch that will work with
> mutt-1.3.26. (Or at least it appears to work -- let me know if you hav
Pete Toscano wrote:
> Does anyone know if/when the S/MIME patch will become part of the main
> mutt tree? I've been using Oliver Ehli's S/MIME patch for
> quite a while now and, for most things, it works fine. The most
> recent patch is for 1.3.23 and more and more rej files are being
> produced
With a bit of effort, I was able to patch 1.3.20 with the S/MIME mods
(using it now) and, while I was able to shoehorn the patch into 1.3.22,
the colors were all messed up, so I'm back using 1.3.20. I'd love to
see an update out for the S/MIME patch.
pete
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Matej Cepl wrote:
2001-01-08-14:12:15 Ralf Hildebrandt:
> Are there any S/MIME command line tools that could be used with mutt?
The only one I've heard of is the OpenSSL command-line utility,
openssl(1). But would integrating invocations of openssl's cmdline
into mutt, call out the Debian license gestapo again? We
On Mon, Mar 27, 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2000-03-27-06:06:50 Magnus Stenman:
> > What is the status on the S/MIME implementation
> > that was mentioned on the list a while ago?
> I've not been interested in it much myself, but as best I can recall
> from what I saw on the list, S/MIME would be
2000-03-27-06:06:50 Magnus Stenman:
> What is the status on the S/MIME implementation
> that was mentioned on the list a while ago?
I've not been interested in it much myself, but as best I can recall
from what I saw on the list, S/MIME would be trivial to do, might
not even require any mods to m
On 05/14/99 Thomas Roessler uttered the following other thing:
> On 1999-05-13 15:36:40 -0400, rfi from Rich Roth wrote:
>
> > Here is where you find all the info on it -- how about joining
> > mutt-dev with your results ?? (hints - we need someone to write
> > the wrapper)
>
> > ftp://ftp.
On 1999-05-13 15:36:40 -0400, rfi from Rich Roth wrote:
> Here is where you find all the info on it -- how about joining
> mutt-dev with your results ?? (hints - we need someone to write
> the wrapper)
> ftp://ftp.franken.de/pub/crypt/cryptlib/
> The code is in the beta directory with a
On Thu, May 13, 1999 at 11:06:47AM -0400, Jos Purvis wrote:
> Hiya. I'm a rabid user of Mutt (ha, ha), and have been using it
Ouch
> signing features (the encryption would be used occasionally but not
> exclusively). I don't know much about S-MIME, so forgive a silly
> question, but do
On Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 01:11:35PM +0200, Martin Keseg - Sun Slovakia - SE wrote:
> Is here a support for:
> S/MIME Cryptographic Signature [applica/x-pkcs7-si, base64, 3.3K]
Not at the moment - the supporting libraries have just been released in a
format that can be used in Mutt and there has b
80 matches
Mail list logo
