pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

[David S Goldberg]

I haven't used pgp in years now that my company standardized on
s/mime.  I have to deal with a customer who uses pgp.  So I built pgp
6.5.8 on a Sun box and would like to use gnus with it.  I assume I'm
supposed to use mml-secure-message-encrypt-pgp to send him an
encrypted message.  I looked at the pgg documentation and it seems
that setting pgg-default-scheme to pgp5 is necessary.  But when I do
that, I get an error that pgg-pgp5-encrypt-region is being called with
a wrong number of arguments.  It looks like something is sticking a t
at the end of it.  Am I doing something wrong?  Is there a bug?  Is
there a better way to do this?

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

[Simon Josefsson]

David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes:

> I haven't used pgp in years now that my company standardized on
> s/mime.  I have to deal with a customer who uses pgp.  So I built pgp
> 6.5.8 on a Sun box and would like to use gnus with it.  I assume I'm
> supposed to use mml-secure-message-encrypt-pgp to send him an
> encrypted message.  I looked at the pgg documentation and it seems
> that setting pgg-default-scheme to pgp5 is necessary.  But when I do
> that, I get an error that pgg-pgp5-encrypt-region is being called with
> a wrong number of arguments.  It looks like something is sticking a t
> at the end of it.  Am I doing something wrong?  Is there a bug?  Is
> there a better way to do this?

You could try GnuPG.  Or the patch below.  Do you know whether PGP
6.5.8 support encryption with signatures?  If so, how do you request
it on the command line?  As comparison, GnuPG has --encrypt --sign.

--- pgg-pgp5.el	20 May 2004 23:57:59 +0200	7.2
+++ pgg-pgp5.el	27 Jul 2004 01:05:08 +0200	
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ;;; pgg-pgp5.el --- PGP 5.* support for PGG.
 
-;; Copyright (C) 1999, 2000, 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+;; Copyright (C) 1999, 2000, 2003, 2004 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 
 ;; Author: Daiki Ueno <ueno@unixuser.org>
 ;; Created: 1999/11/02
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@
 		 (buffer-substring (match-end 0)(progn (end-of-line)(point)))))
 	 2)))))
 
-(defun pgg-pgp5-encrypt-region (start end recipients)
+(defun pgg-pgp5-encrypt-region (start end recipients &optional sign)
   "Encrypt the current region between START and END."
   (let* ((pgg-pgp5-user-id (or pgg-pgp5-user-id pgg-default-user-id))
 	 (args

Re: pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:07:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson
>>>>> <jas@extundo.com> said:

> You could try GnuPG.  Or the patch below.

From a past experience I thought that GnuPG wouldn't be compatible.
However since it's already installed by cygwin I gave it a shot.  It
imported both my and my correspondent's keys without trouble and at
least appears to have worked.  So unless he isn't able to read it for
some reason I'll stick with gnupg.

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net

Re: pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

[Simon Josefsson]

David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes:

>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:07:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson
>>>>>> <jas@extundo.com> said:
>
>> You could try GnuPG.  Or the patch below.
>
> From a past experience I thought that GnuPG wouldn't be compatible.

With what?  I haven't had compatibility problems with modern GnuPG,
except when corresponding to PGP 2.x users, but then the problem is
really that PGP 2.x doesn't implement OpenPGP.  Some painful code has
been added, so that Gnus generate, using PGG/GnuPG, messages that can
be read even by RFC 1991 compatible implementations, like PGP 2.x.
IIRC, one example was that RFC 1991 doesn't ignore trailing white
space, as in the '-- ' signature separator, but RFC 2440 does.  But if
you use AES, it isn't likely that PGP 2.x will be able to read it
anyway.

Re: pgp 6.5.8 and gnus

[David S Goldberg]

>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 18:55:28 +0200, Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> said:

> David S Goldberg <david.goldberg6@verizon.net> writes:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:07:31 +0200, Simon Josefsson
>>>>>>> <jas@extundo.com> said:
>> 
>>> You could try GnuPG.  Or the patch below.
>> 
>> From a past experience I thought that GnuPG wouldn't be compatible.

> With what?  I haven't had compatibility problems with modern GnuPG,
> except when corresponding to PGP 2.x users, but then the problem is

I'm sure that was exactly my problem at the time.  Until now I never
got past pgp 2.6.2.  By the time pgp went to version 5, my company had
settled on s/mime so I never had a need to upgrade.

-- 
Dave Goldberg
david.goldberg6@verizon.net