DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

[Norman Walsh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 655 bytes --]

I've just discovered that my signed messages don't make it through to
my colleagues crackberries. Apparently something in the gateway drops
messages with attachments, or something.

Can EPG be configured via gnus-posting-styles so that I can turn it on
and off on a per-group basis?

Failing that, or may be irrespective of that answer, has anyone yet
constructed a tool that will send mail using the proprietary protocol
that Exchange uses?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Time wounds all heels.
http://nwalsh.com/            | 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --]

Re: DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

[Adam Sjøgren]

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:12:39 -0400, Norman wrote:

> Failing that, or may be irrespective of that answer, has anyone yet
> constructed a tool that will send mail using the proprietary protocol
> that Exchange uses?

The closest is perhaps this ongoing effort to reverse engineer the MAPI
protocol:

 <http://openchange.org/>

I'm not sure how close it is to work for sending email (I used it
briefly to hack a tool to extract emails from Microsoft Exchange Server
2007; fortunately the administrators finally turned on IMAP and my need
went away).


  Best regards,

    Adam

-- 
 "Angels can fly because they take themselves lightly."       Adam Sjøgren
                                                         asjo@koldfront.dk

Re: DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

[Norman Walsh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 790 bytes --]

/ Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> was heard to say:
| I've just discovered that my signed messages don't make it through to
| my colleagues crackberries. Apparently something in the gateway drops
| messages with attachments, or something.
|
| Can EPG be configured via gnus-posting-styles so that I can turn it on
| and off on a per-group basis?

I gather from the lack of replies that the answer is "no". Anyone want
to wack me with a clue-by-four about how to get this behavior?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | If you wish to advance into the
http://nwalsh.com/            | infinite, explore the finite in all
                              | directions.-- Goethe

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --]

Re: DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:08:51 -0400 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: 

NW> / Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> was heard to say:
NW> | I've just discovered that my signed messages don't make it through to
NW> | my colleagues crackberries. Apparently something in the gateway drops
NW> | messages with attachments, or something.
NW> |
NW> | Can EPG be configured via gnus-posting-styles so that I can turn it on
NW> | and off on a per-group basis?

NW> I gather from the lack of replies that the answer is "no". Anyone want
NW> to wack me with a clue-by-four about how to get this behavior?

Not with gnus-posting-styles AFAIK but you can try a hook on summary
entry that sets things up appropriately based on the group name.

Ted

Re: DSig + gnus-posting-styles?

[Rob Weir]

On 22 Jul 2008, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:08:51 -0400 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
>
> NW> / Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> was heard to say: 
> NW> I've just discovered that my signed messages don't make it through
> NW> to | my colleagues crackberries. Apparently something in the
> NW> gateway drops | messages with attachments, or something.
> NW> 
> NW> Can EPG be configured via gnus-posting-styles so that I can turn
> NW> it on | and off on a per-group basis?
>
> NW> I gather from the lack of replies that the answer is "no". Anyone
> NW> want to wack me with a clue-by-four about how to get this
> NW> behavior?
>
> Not with gnus-posting-styles AFAIK but you can try a hook on summary
> entry that sets things up appropriately based on the group name.

Note pure gnus, but maybe bbdb-pgp is worth a try - it configures
signatures/encryption settings for messages using the 'pgp-mail' field
for BBDB-listed recipients (not sure how well it works with epg, though,
or with multiple recipients).

-- 
-rob