https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36970
--- Comment #13 from orcmid <[email protected]> --- @thackert, Thank you for your direct request. I have provided confirmation below. I have ignored all of the NEEDINFO business because it was part of automated house-keeping. As the submitter, it made something my job that I felt was unnecessary. 1. No person has made a request for more information that would clarify any question about the bug report. 2. I am asked to report whether it is fixed or not, without any indication that anyone took action that might have fixed it. I.e., "we did something about this, would you look at it to confirm that we've resolve the issue you reported?" None of that happened. I did considerable work to identify the problem (without providing screen captures and keyboard sequences) and to propose a solution (well, in the context of how Windows does it). In fact, there has been no change. The situation is the same as it apparently has been for years. REPRODUCTION/CONFIRMATION [Done 2013-07-04T16:24Z using embedded Help with LibreOffice 4.0.1.2 on Windows en-x86.] 1. Open LibreOffice Writer with a blank document. 2. Click Help and get LibreOffice embedded Help. 3. In the Index, Search term tab, type "digital signatures" 4. When the "digital signatures" term scrolls up, click the "getting/managing/applying" subtopic. 5. Read the Managing Certificates topic. That is wrong. Getting new root certificates is something you can do. It has nothing to do with having your own private key certificate and how it ends up in a protected key store on your machine. It is true that a recipient of something signed by you needs a trusted root certificate to verify the authenticity of your *public* key, because it is counter-signed by the CA, but that is a different part of the protocol that is not addressed in this topic at all. Going into details probably requires explanation of how this is different on different platforms. I gave a lengthy suggestion as something that could be adapted for the Windows case. It is probably best to link form embedded help to more-extensive explanations in on-line help, on a wiki, or somewhere that provides factual information about this. Finally, I would like to point out that it is remarkable to suggest on that same page that signing macros is worthless for a document that is signed. That's not true. Unless it is simply implemented horribly wrong, the signatures on macros should survive editing of the document so long as a signed macro is not edited. That's the point of having macros signed, so that they can be trusted by people when they are found in documents and when they are reused too. When a signed document is edited, that is no reason to invalidate the separately-created signatures on embedded macros that are not touched, whether or not still used. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ Libreoffice-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
