OT: Email signing

[Michael H. Warfield]

On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 14:55 -0600, Michael Yep wrote:
> 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

	Hmmm...  What MUA where you using?

	This looks to be a "Content-Transfer-Encoding" issue.  If it's not
nested the GPG signature has no MIME "Content-Transfer-Encoding".  If
it's nested within an S/MIME signed wrapping, it's been set to and
encoded "Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable".  The encoding is
correct but your MUA failed to unencode it before trying to verify it.
So GPG complains that it ran into a quoted-printable escape, which it
did (but it's certainly not the MTA's fault here).  So the question is,
did Evolution make an error when it encoded the GPG signature
quoted-printable or did the receiving MUA make the error when it failed
to honor it.  This is exactly the kind of compatibility errors one might
expect.

> 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
> 
-- 
Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 985-6132 |  mhw at WittsEnd.com
   /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/          | (678) 463-0932 |  http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
   NIC whois: MHW9          | An optimist believes we live in the best of all
 PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471        | possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of it!

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/attachments/20060131/72d025a6/attachment-0001.sig>