No luck. This one also came through as invalid. One thing I noticed is that although some of your posts came through marked "Invalid signature" by evolution prior to last Sept. or Oct., the proportion of these, compared to those which evolution validated, rose substantially after that time.
I'll go back through these and see if I can see any obvious pattern. On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 21:50 -0500, Sam Varshavchik wrote: > So, what's probably happening is that Evolutions gets one of these wrong. > But what I don't understand is that you say that the sig does verify on some > messages. But, if Evolution is either misparsing the MIME boundary delimiter > string, or failing to convert the text to the canonical CRLF format, then it > should be getting the signatures wrong every time. > > Maybe Evolution mistakenly trims off all trailing newlines from all > messages, so the sig would fail to verify if a signed message ends with a > blank line. > > This message shouldn't end with a logical blank line. Let's see if Evolution > manages to get the signature right, with this one. > > > Invalid signature -- Lindsay Haisley | "Humor will get you through times of no humor FMP Computer Services | better than no humor will get you through 512-259-1190 | times of humor." http://www.fmp.com | - Butch Hancock ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow - 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts. SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 _______________________________________________ courier-users mailing list courier-users@lists.sourceforge.net Unsubscribe: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/courier-users