Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-30 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 22:39, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > Evolution currently has problems verifying inline PGP signed messages > from mailers when they are qp'd by a gateway along the way. Mutt doesn't > have that problem so I'm suggesting being liberal (as it is inline pgp > anyway) and unencode fi

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Thomas O'Dowd
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 10:03:55PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 21:27, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:33:42PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 20:15, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > > > It takes care of escaping the "^From " for you

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 21:27, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:33:42PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 20:15, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > > It takes care of escaping the "^From " for you so you don't have to > > > worry about it. > > > > That's nice, but it d

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 21:27, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:33:42PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 20:15, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > > It takes care of escaping the "^From " for you so you don't have to > > > worry about it. > > > > That's nice, but it d

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Thomas O'Dowd
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:33:42PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 20:15, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > It takes care of escaping the "^From " for you so you don't have to > > worry about it. > > That's nice, but it doesn't take care of QP encoding it and I'm not too > sure that

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
...and if you're on DOS, "piping it to pgp" has text in the canonical CRLF format, whereas in Unix it doesn't. Also, if the text contains 8bit text, do we QP encode before or after we sign it? If we QP encode before, will the other mailer know to feed the encoded text to pgp? Or will it assume th

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 20:15, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > It takes care of escaping the "^From " for you so you don't have to > worry about it. That's nice, but it doesn't take care of QP encoding it and I'm not too sure that it CRLF encodes it either. Jeff -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Xim

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Thomas O'Dowd
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 08:10:15PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 19:50, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > > > In-line pgp mode is a broken way to do it - so many things can go > > > "wrong". Should I first Q

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Dan Winship
> The problem is that you guys don't fully understand the problem, to you > it sounds as simple as "just pipe it to pgp or gpg and whallah" but it's > not that simple. Well, not if you expect the other end to be able to > verify your signatures at least. Sure, I could just pipe to pgp/gpg, but > i

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 19:50, Thomas O'Dowd wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > In-line pgp mode is a broken way to do it - so many things can go > > "wrong". Should I first QP/Base64 encode the text before signing? or > > should I do it afterward? Do

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Thomas O'Dowd
On Thu, Nov 29, 2001 at 03:33:32PM -0500, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > In-line pgp mode is a broken way to do it - so many things can go > "wrong". Should I first QP/Base64 encode the text before signing? or > should I do it afterward? Do I From-escape before? afterward? ever? Do I > CRLF encode b

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 17:52, Levente Farkas wrote: > Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > It works for me... although someone reported a bug saying that when a > > recipient's gpg key is not signed, when sending them encrypted mail, it > > only encrypts to the sender's key. > > yes it's true thre rec

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Jeffrey Stedfast
On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 05:25, Levente Farkas wrote: > hi, > and at last gpg simple unusable with evolution. when I try send an encripted > mail with evo (I have to go to the menu and click on a menu item, it > would be much simpler if I able to check it somewhere within the > composer window and I

Re: [Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Levente Farkas
Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > On Thu, 2001-11-29 at 05:25, Levente Farkas wrote: > > hi, > > and at last gpg simple unusable with evolution. when I try send an encripted > > mail with evo (I have to go to the menu and click on a menu item, it > > would be much simpler if I able to check it somewher

[Evolution] pgp unusable?

2001-11-29 Thread Levente Farkas
hi, and at last gpg simple unusable with evolution. when I try send an encripted mail with evo (I have to go to the menu and click on a menu item, it would be much simpler if I able to check it somewhere within the composer window and I always be able to see wheter it will be encrypted or not).