From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/59926 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: david.goldberg6@verizon.net (David S. Goldberg) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: #secure smime signencrypt not working to myself Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:29:33 -0500 Organization: I Yam What I Yam Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109694339 21231 80.91.229.2 (1 Mar 2005 16:25:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 16:25:39 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ding-owner+M8467@lists.math.uh.edu Tue Mar 01 17:25:39 2005 Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13] ident=mail) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D6ABh-00027a-8W for ding-account@gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:25:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1D6AFx-0004NX-00; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:29:58 -0600 Original-Received: from util2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.23]) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 1D6AFu-0004NS-00 for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:29:54 -0600 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by util2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1D6AFq-0007hp-Si for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 10:29:51 -0600 Original-Received: from smtp-bedford-x.mitre.org ([192.160.51.76] helo=smtp-bedford.mitre.org) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1D6AFp-0000pF-00 for ; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 17:29:49 +0100 Original-Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id j21GTku27937 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:29:46 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp-bedford.mitre.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91BD8BF81 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:29:46 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from MAILHUB1 (mailhub1.mitre.org [129.83.20.31]) by smtp-bedford.mitre.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j21GTkN27879 for ; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:29:46 -0500 Original-Received: from blackbird.mitre.org (129.83.50.102) by mailhub1.mitre.org with SMTP id 13636078; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:29:43 -0500 Original-To: The Gnus Mailing List X-Face: GUaHTH@nS>[7,ME@-gYZ4#Wl{z"99k@[[Y8AcP0x1paqu.,z9,XSV1WI>{q3f6^e5(zrit <4fV&VHhmE`uidRqtmG27;si9&r;#KSF~E#$%W8w(xdp)H4tW=\2XOk~3=@oGqqpj;m4xf Ow;y26396&,34@9#~4;@*S;E0cq"LM9N(us4P%F(Nxis'Vvfm9?KufH;:Q$dMa-QWGLR&K d0`LJZE8xb*>^yN>b]_NcU:E=Zn\1=#/(OS2 User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) XEmacs/21.4.15 (cygwin32) X-Spam-Score: -4.9 (----) Precedence: bulk Original-Sender: ding-owner@lists.math.uh.edu X-MailScanner-From: ding-owner+m8467@lists.math.uh.edu X-MailScanner-To: ding-account@gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59926 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:59926 A while back I posted my method for doing smime encryption and signatures by building a multipart around the entire message and call mml-secure-encrypt-smime and mml-secure-sign-smime and going through the headers to insert the appropriate key and cert files. The recent changes made to gnus' smime functionality encouraged me to try to work in a more "standard" fashion so I set up mml-encrypt-alist to use my function to traverse the headers and determine the appropriate key and cert files (I still haven't had much luck with the new ldap interface, probably because I use XEmacs) without prompting when I run mml-secure-message-encrypt-smime and it works mostly great with one exception. Messages either sent to my self via mail or gcc are not readable. I get an error: Could not identify PKCS#7 type. Thunderbird is also unable to read the message so it's not just some weird limitation in gnus. On the command line I'm able to pipe openssl smime -decrypt to openssl smime -verify to read the message. Go figure. mml-signencrypt-style-alist is the default with smime set to separate, but it's apparently not equivalent to having two mode tags in the #secure which is just as well since #secure only seems to be willing to recognize one mode tag anyway. Any thoughts on how to track this down? Thanks, -- Dave Goldberg david.goldberg6@verizon.net