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

List:       sylpheed
Subject:    [sylpheed:25828] Re: [PATCH] Parse PKCS-7 (S/MIME, X.509) signatures
From:       Thomas White <taw27 () cam ! ac ! uk>
Date:       2005-09-27 21:27:51
Message-ID: 20050927222751.94268a0c.taw27 () cam ! ac ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]


On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:38:00 +0200
Colin Leroy <colin@colino.net> wrote:

> This way I could fix it properly. 
> http://colino.net/tmp/1 for example, does not pass for me without the
> content encoding set to base64.

With the mail from your posted URL, and WITHOUT the extra base64 lines,
I get the following:

[application/x-pkcs7-signature (Valid signature (untrusted key))]

i.e. it Works for me.  If I DO use the extra base64 lines, I get:

[application/x-pkcs7-signature (Error verifying the signature)]

The following mail:
http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~taw27/stuff/badsig.txt
gives me the following WITHOUT the base64 refinement:

[application/pkcs7-signature (BAD signature)]

I don't know why the signature comes out bad - I can get a good
signature when the sender uses a different client (Evolution instead of
Mulberry), but at least the right data is getting to GPGME.  WITH the
base64 refinement, I get the following result:

[application/pkcs7-signature (Error verifying the signature)]

Is there some difference between Sylpheed and Sylpheed-Claws in how the
data is presented to or parsed in check_signature()?

Tom

-- 

Thomas White
Downing College
Cambridge

GPG: 1024D / D8834197
9749 7C8A 037D F867 9F38 F7C0 2314 8F97 D883 4197

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

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