On Wed, Feb 04, 2015 at 12:34:20PM -0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> So, I've been working on my opportunistic encrypt patch set again.  I'm
> almost ready to send out the patches, but I'd like some feedback on (at
> least) one thing first.

I've been using a previous version of the opp-enc patch set and now
decided to test this one.  A short review from a user's perspective:

    * in general, the opp-enc mode works well and does not seem to
      interfere with the way I expect mutt to behave

    * adding this functionality as an "encryption-mode" makes sense
      and it took me just a few seconds to understand what actually
      has changed (the previous patch worked differently)

    * any updates to the recipient list (to/cc/bcc) automatically and
      reliably updates security-settings (if keys for all recipients
      have been found, the message will be encrypted, plain otherwise)

    * when both crypt_replyencrypt and crypt_opportunistic_encrypt are
      set, crypt_replyencrypt prevails in almost all cases:  it does not
      when replying to multiple messages (tag n messages, <tag-prefix>,
      <reply>)

    * opp-enc considers unverified keys as valid candidates for
      encryption;  mutt, however, will double check before actually
      using them

UI-"screenshots":

Compose message to recipient with key..

    =====================================================================
    y:Send  q:Abort  t:To  c:CC  s:Subj  a:Attach file  d:Descrip  ?:Help
        From: me
  *       To: i-have-a-key
          Cc:
         Bcc:
     Subject: opportunistic encryption
    Reply-To:
         Fcc: =archive
  * Security: Sign, Encrypt (PGP/MIME) (OppEnc mode)
     sign as: AABBCCDD
    =====================================================================

modify recipients..

    ========================================================================
    y:Send  q:Abort  t:To  c:CC  s:Subj  a:Attach file  d:Descrip  ?:Help
        From: me
          To: i-have-a-key
  *       Cc: i-have-no-key
         Bcc:
     Subject: opportunistic encryption
    Reply-To:
         Fcc: =archive
  * Security: Sign (PGP/MIME) (OppEnc mode)
     sign as: AABBCCDD
    ========================================================================

press <p>..

    ========================================================================
    y:Send  q:Abort  t:To  c:CC  s:Subj  a:Attach file  d:Descrip  ?:Help
        From: me
          To: i-have-a-key
          Cc: i-have-no-key
         Bcc:
     Subject: opportunistic encryption
    Reply-To:
         Fcc: =archive
    Security: Sign (PGP/MIME) (OppEnc mode)
     sign as: AABBCCDD

    (...)

  * PGP (s)ign, sign (a)s, (i)nline format, (c)lear, or (o)ppenc mode off?
    ========================================================================

press <o>..

    ========================================================================
    y:Send  q:Abort  t:To  c:CC  s:Subj  a:Attach file  d:Descrip  ?:Help
        From: me
          To: i-have-a-key
          Cc: i-have-no-key
         Bcc:
     Subject: opportunistic encryption
    Reply-To:
         Fcc: =archive
  * Security: Sign (PGP/MIME)
     sign as: AABBCCDD
    ========================================================================

modify recipients..

    ========================================================================
    y:Send  q:Abort  t:To  c:CC  s:Subj  a:Attach file  d:Descrip  ?:Help
        From: me
          To: i-have-a-key
  *       Cc:
         Bcc:
     Subject: opportunistic encryption
    Reply-To:
         Fcc: =archive
  * Security: Sign (PGP/MIME)
     sign as: AABBCCDD
    ========================================================================


With this patch, religiously keeping an eye on the security settings is
no longer mandatory.  It also allows us to retire all the workarounds we
were previously using to achieve the same with manual or auto-generated
crypto-hooks.

Thanks for the effort,

                Petar

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to