On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM, Markus Wiederkehr <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 11:23 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin > <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip> >> it's not as simple as that: SMIME (and OpenPGP/MIME) require >> canonicalisation and normalisation > > I know.. we've already had this discussion to some extent. > > One the one hand we have RFC2633 that is a bit vague when it comes to > the concrete canonicalization steps: "The exact details of > canonicalization depend on the actual MIME type and subtype of an > entity, and are not described here." But at least it describes basic > CRLF canonicalization. > > On the other hand we have some real world MUAs that support S/MIME.. I > know for sure that Outlook does not even perform basic CRLF > canonicalization. Neither Outlook nor Thunderbird decode transfer > encodings before verifying (nor should they if I understand > correctly). > > So in order to support explicit S/MIME signatures Mime4j must not > automatically decode transfer encodings the way it does now. This > process is never reversible, especially for quoted-printable. > > CRLF canonicalization does not worry me because it can always be > applied with a simple filter stream.. i've switch to a JIRA so we can continue the conversation after 0.6 has shipped - robert
