Hi John Jack Doe: Am 28.02.19 10:44 schrieb(en) [email protected]:
I am retired and use Balsa for my private email communication as well as for my part-time job. For the part-time job I have to retrieve GnuPG/MIME encrypted mail from an IMAP account. These mails I can't decrypt because Balsa reports always 'Balsa decryption failed: GPME: decryption failed: Decryption failed'. In order to check this I sent an encrypted email to myself and retrieved it from the IMAP account - decryption failed. Could it be that this is the same failure Albrecht reported?
The issue you are referring to affected S/MIME (GpgME) encrypted messages only, but /not/ GnuPG, neither in MIME nor the old single-part format. However, the error message you cite indicates that it's actually GpgME (not GnuPG) which fails, so I guess the answer might be yes. If it's really GnuPG which fails I would bet the IMAP server is M$ Exchange - it has (or at least had) issues dealing with GnuPG (PGP in general) encryption and signatures, basically mangling such messages so any MUA (not only Balsa) is unable to decrypt them or to check their signatures.
If yes, please Albrecht could you build a new Balsa package for me from git?
I could build a Debian Stretch package for you… However, it raises a more general question – shouldn't we prepare a new release anyway? I think there have been many improvements since the last one last year. I still have a new GUI for managing IMAP subscriptions in my pipeline, and I wanted to look into XOAUTH2 for gmail or yahoo (which is *not* safer than the methods Balsa supports now, opposed to what Google claims!), but those shouldn't be show-stoppers. And the README and help files are really outdated, which seems to be more critical. Opinions? Cheers, Albrecht.
pgp0ccivJCzRB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ balsa-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/balsa-list
