You are right. If you look at smime.c you will see that Mutt desperatly
needs either smime-type or (to satisfy Netscape 4.x mailers) a
Content-Description.
As s/mime is in development, we all have to wait or find some
workarounds for it. See my mail from 18-09-02 for my current solution.
I'm sure we have to discuss this further in private or join the mutt-dev
list.
BTW: the right way of figuring out if we have an "enveloped-data" or
"signed-data" would be to look into the data itself (I was told). You
can do this by:
openssl smime -pk7out -in mail.msg | openssl asn1parse -dump
Timo T. Rajala [2002-09-20 14:18]:
> * Timo T. Rajala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > One difference is that the "smime-type=enveloped-data;" row is missing
> > from the MS mail. I inserted this row in the MS mail and opened the
> > mail in mutt: now both signature check and decrypt works.
> >
> > My question is: Is the MS MUA not following the S/MIME standard by
> > omitting this row or is mutt wrong by not being able to handle it
> > without this row?
>
> So this MS MUA SHOULD include "smime-type", but is not and mutt should
> be able to determine the MIME type from the file extension but is not.
--
Alex Pleiner
zeitform Internet Dienste Fraunhoferstrasse 5
64283 Darmstadt, Germany
http://www.zeitform.de Tel.: +49 (0)6151 155-635
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: +49 (0)6151 155-634
GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0x613C21EA
