[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-bugs-dist
Subject:    [Bug 115858] Secret passphrase appears in adressbook
From:       Jochen Gold <J.Gold () Web ! de>
Date:       2005-11-07 21:34:18
Message-ID: 20051107213418.16995.qmail () ktown ! kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
         
http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115858         




------- Additional Comments From J.Gold Web de  2005-11-07 22:34 -------
Hello,

since no one realy knows in which domain this bug apears I adress this email 
to you both.

It's some month ago, that I "experimented" with encryption. So I can't really 
remember all configurations I tryed.

I know I instaled a programm, that keeps the passphrase in the memory, so that 
I don't have to type it every time, when I want to reed encryped eamils, that 
are encryped with the same key. But I don't remember the name of it.

What seems strage is that I habe two entrys in my adressbook, one with upper 
case and one with lover case. Only the one with lover case is correct.
In the propertys of the adressentry under encryption 
(Verschlüsselungseinstellungen) all allowed protokols (Erlaubte Protokolle) 
are marked.

I tryed to replicare the bug, with no sucess so far.
I think I wound need to delete the "wrong" adressentres for more tests. But 
maybe they cound a of use to find the bug?

If you have any sugestions what I should test I would certainly do.

Perhaps the whole bug is a problem of kMail?

I offer you any help you cound need.

Greetings,
Jochen



Am Montag, 7. November 2005 20:04 schrieb bj altern org:
[bugs.kde.org quoted mail]
I tryer this, nothing strange happend.

>
> By the way, did you compile Kgpg by yourself ? Otherwise, where did you get
> it from ?

I did not compile it. I can't remember where I got it from, either it was 
included in my distribution, or installed it with synaptic.

>
> This issue surely requires a serious investigation, but as I said, I have
> no clue for the moment.
>
> regards
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]