This is an explanation such that less advanced users can follow, if they are, like I was, eager to learn how to verify emails from web.
( Just if you see any sigs when you follow below, do the: gpg --recv-key XXXXXXXX ) If you've been subscribed to Muut, you can follow this. Go to you mutt maildir. Do not open any messages. Hit '/' . You're in the command track in bottom. And now type (or paste this): =h 20160921191202.GB18462 and hit Enter. The first find is the message that Claus Assmann used as example. (We only need the message where that number is part of Message-ID string, not where it is part of In-Reply-To or References string.) Enter to open the message. It shows (to me and others) as having BAD signature. Notice how it turns to be for you. I have maildir, and if I would do the below, it would create a small maildir folder. So I first have to do: touch ClausAssmann.eml (I named it after the poster of the proof-of-concept non-verbose little tar archive at: http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147448664132307&w=2 but for clarity I'll attach the same file here as ClausAssmann.tar, because I can thank Claus (and Ian Zimmermann in this other email http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147432705018043&w=2 ) that I now know myself how to verify mails from web. And I want to share it with less advanced than I am. Untar that file ClausAssmann.tar. The result must be: $ ls -l ClausAssmann.d total 8 -rw------- 1 miro miro 1422 2016-09-21 21:31 m4 -rw------- 1 miro miro 824 2016-09-21 21:31 m4.sig $ ) With the mail we just found opened in Mutt, type: C and save it to (the touched) ClausAssmann.eml . Now you can run this command: grep -A80 'Content-Type: text\/plain; charset=utf-8' ClausAssmann.eml \ | head -36 > ClausAssmann.eml.1 You're close to verifing that email. But not there yet, as I purposefully left the incriminating header (culprit my_hdr of Mutt being buggy as Claus Assmann stated in this mail: http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147458978829311&w=2 ) If you now view the diff of the two files with, they're entirely different. But if you view them with vimdiff there's only the X-Clacks-Overhead line the difference... Rerun the slightly modified command: grep -A80 'Content-Type: text\/plain; charset=utf-8' ClausAssmann.eml \ | grep -v 'X-Clacks-Overhead' \ | head -35 > ClausAssmann.eml.2 Now still entirely different with diff, and completely same with vimdiff. Because it's the end of line is the difference! Solely! I can convert, the one that I saved, with Vim: vi ClausAssmann.eml.2 :se ff=dos :wq Now I can verify that email, either way, because both the incomplete parts of the raw email (the part that PGP verifies) are exactly the same: $ ls -l ClausAssmann.eml.2 ClausAssmann.d/m4 -rw------- 1 miro miro 1422 2016-09-21 21:31 ClausAssmann.d/m4 -rw-r--r-- 1 miro miro 1422 2016-09-23 15:00 ClausAssmann.eml.2 $ sha256sum ClausAssmann.eml.2 ClausAssmann.d/m4 f86f0c710b7b7feaaca11511e66c1335b35bb7c8e18c47208702fb603c393c02 ClausAssmann.eml.2 f86f0c710b7b7feaaca11511e66c1335b35bb7c8e18c47208702fb603c393c02 ClausAssmann.d/m4 $ Any of these two verify correctly: gpg --verify ClausAssmann.d/m4.sig ClausAssmann.eml.2 gpg --verify ClausAssmann.d/m4.sig ClausAssmann.d/m4 with signature good. --- Anyway, folks, it really would be time for Lurker (if only I didn't work at turtle speed... Worse, I have been sick now for almost two days, still recovering.)... Whatever the interface of marc.info, it is pretty poorly creating and following the threads. The emails that I needed to post the addresses of, would be a few seconds and not minutes to find (like I spent searhing to find the links for this email), if the Mutt archive was deployed with Lurker... Only saying. And wishing. Allow errata after I post this. Regards! -- Miroslav Rovis Zagreb, Croatia http://www.CroatiaFidelis.hr
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature