OT: Email signing

[Michael Yep]

This did not sign properly
I got a message : gpg command line and output:,C:\\gnupg\\gpg.exe
--charset utf8  --batch --no-tty --status-fd 2 --verify,gpg: CRC error;
c8aba6 - dc3c8a,gpg: quoted printable character in armor - probably a
buggy MTA has been used

Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> I guess it would have helped if I had actually flipped the S/MIME bit
> BEFORE hitting send.  The previous message did not have the S/MIME
> signature.  This one should.  :-(  I doubled checked it this time...
> 
> 	Mike
> 
> On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 15:32 -0500, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> 
>>On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 23:47 +1030, Tim wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 23:36 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>>>
>>>>1) Can I do both SMIME and PGP in my emails?
>>
>>>I wouldn't think so.  A signature is added to a message as confirmation
>>>that the message hasn't been tampered with, therefore its based on the
>>>message contents.
>>
>>>Conjecture, because adding a signature adds to the contents:  If you
>>>were to add one then the other, the first signature would try to
>>>proclaim the message to be okay.  The second signature added would try
>>>to proclaim the message with the first signature, in combination, to be
>>>okay.  But adding the second signature changed the message, so anyone
>>>trying only to use the first signature (because that's all that their
>>>client supported) would see the message had been changed (by the second
>>>signature).
>>
>>	This message should be signed by both S/MIME and PGP, so, yes, it's
>>"possible".  In this case, the signatures do nest in a nested multipart
>>MIME hierarchy.  The message body is encoded quoted-printable in one
>>MIME part.  The encoded part is then signed and the signature is in
>>another MIME part.  That assemblage is nested in another MIME part which
>>is then S/MIME signed and that forms another MIME part.
>>
>>        Message ----
>>                Mime S ----
>>                        Mime P ----
>>                                Body
>>                        Mime P ----
>>                                GPG signature on Body
>>                        Mime P ----
>>                Mime S ----
>>                        S/Mime Signature on Mime P
>>                Mime S ----
>>        Message ----
>>
>>	Now, why anyone would want to do this, I don't know.  But it obviously
>>is possible and Evolution will, obviously, do it.  In theory, this
>>should work.  No guarantees about any and all clients being able to read
>>and verify it, however.  Evolution certainly handles it.  I've seen
>>enough compatibility problems between varying clients just withing pure
>>PGP/GPG and within pure S/MIME to have any expectations here.
>>
>>	My S/MIME certificate is signed by the CACert.org, <www.cacert.org>,
>>root certificate.  Maybe we'll see who can verify either with what...
>>
>>	Mike
>>-- 
>>fedora-list mailing list
>>fedora-list at redhat.com
>>To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
>>

-- 
Michael Yep
Development / Technical Operations
RemoteLink, Inc.
(630) 983-0072 x164

GPG Public Key
http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x126439D9