Hi Nico--
thanks for your work on this; i'm really glad to see people thinking it
through in detail.
Responses in more detail below, along with a more radical proposal that
hopefully we can use to think through the desired behavior.
On 04/21/2014 04:11 PM, Nicolai Josuttis wrote:
Let me try
On 04/20/2014 07:12 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
I think it's a really bad idea to make encryption contingent on trust
settings; it should only be contingent on validity.
let me explain this a bit further:
* setting non-zero ownertrust on someone's keys puts you at risk of
being willing
On 03/26/2014 09:57 AM, Mike Acker wrote:
On 03/25/2014 06:21 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
hi enigmail folks--
1ee310b5bcdb86f225cc11ca0ae2138a7aaba992 addresses bugs 212 and 179 with
a menu option called trust the keys of all recipients.
I think what this implies is that when sending
On 03/16/2014 11:46 AM, Boris Month wrote:
me and some friends of mine want to exchange encrypted emails on our
mailing list. Does enigmail support encryption for multiple recepients?
How would you encrypt information on a mailing list?
You might be interested in schleuder, which is an
On 02/05/2014 10:06 AM, Onno Ekker wrote:
Well, to me it would also make sense to encrypt to the newest key by
default (by creation date), which would eliminate the need to create a per
recipient rule in most cases...
Having per recipient rules also brings the necessity to manage and maintain
On 01/30/2014 09:08 AM, Nathan Andrew Fain wrote:
it appears the enigmail has issues when the text of lines will get
wrapped. What I believe is happening is that the signature is made
before the text is converted to its unformatted version and
line-wrapped. So, the signature is created on this
This addresses http://sourceforge.net/p/enigmail/bugs/239/
---
ui/content/enigmailCommon.js | 5 -
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/ui/content/enigmailCommon.js b/ui/content/enigmailCommon.js
index b10375c..e19d9b0 100644
--- a/ui/content/enigmailCommon.js
+++
On 12/14/2013 09:23 AM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
On 13.12.13 22:29, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
in http://bugs.debian.org/732067, a user reports that the checkbox
Automatically decrypt/verfiy messages in the OpenPGP menu isn't
working any more.
Apparently, the menu option is only
On Wed 2013-01-16 09:12:09 -0500, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
On 15.01.13 21:10, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
Question B --
Would patches be welcome to improve the terminology around validity
and trust?
Sure, yes :-)
It's been a while, but I've finally sent a patch to the list
in http://bugs.debian.org/732067, a user reports that the checkbox
Automatically decrypt/verfiy messages in the OpenPGP menu isn't
working any more.
Apparently, the menu option is only available when show expert
preferences is chosen in the OpenPGP preferences dialog.
The inital report came in
---
ui/locale/en-US/enigmail.properties | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/ui/locale/en-US/enigmail.properties
b/ui/locale/en-US/enigmail.properties
index 74021fa..ea5141a 100644
--- a/ui/locale/en-US/enigmail.properties
+++ b/ui/locale/en-US/enigmail.properties
This patch records the library name and constants expected for debian
GNU/kFreeBSD. Without this line, enigmail 1.6 on that platform
fails with:
[ERROR] enigmail.js: Enigmail.setAgentPath: subprocess.call failed with
'TypeError: platformDefaults[gXulRuntime.OS.toLowerCase(...)] is undefined'
On 11/12/2013 12:27 PM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
This patch won't work for Thunderbird 19 and newer, as the referenced
${enigDllFile} (line 153) is only generated on Gecko version = 18.
Thus the files would not match.
this seems like something that genxpi should know about, no? If it
knows
i'm trying to use the standard enigmail debugging capability to figure
out why a message is failing verification in enigmail.
The message is clearsigned PGP/MIME, and it verifes correctly in another
MUA (notmuch, using libgmime). Other clearsigned PGP/MIME messages
verify correctly.
When i
On 11/12/2013 02:19 PM, ernie wrote:
I have been following this thread for some time.
That's interesting, because i just started this thread a few hours ago!
Out of curiosity, are these problems win a flavor of Widows or Linux?
I don't use Windows, so i don't know if these are problems on
Without this change, zip would happily carry on even if some elements
are missing due to other undetected failures in the build process.
It's better to catch errors in the .xpi generation at build time,
rather than at install or runtime.
---
genxpi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1
This patch allows the build to proceed cleanly when using
-Wunused-but-set-variable and without FORCE_PR_LOG
---
src/nsEnigMsgCompose.cpp | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/nsEnigMsgCompose.cpp b/src/nsEnigMsgCompose.cpp
index 2bc3f7a..91ca07e 100644
---
On 11/11/2013 05:43 PM, Michael Norrish wrote:
As for //, compilers have had this forever given that it's been in C++
forever.
yes, of course all modern compilers have this option. however, there's
no reason for gratuitous incompatibility against older compilers or for
people who for whatever
Hi Ralf--
On 10/15/2013 05:14 PM, Ralf Jung wrote:
why does Enigmail refuse to use an unsigned key for encryption? A friend
of mine recently contacted me via encrypted mail, and while I was able
to get her key from a keyserver, I couldn't get a signature for it, so I
decided to do that later
On 10/09/2013 05:47 PM, Bryant Evans wrote:
Not sure my message earlier went through. Trying again. I am using
PGP/MIME as suggested.
both of these PGP/MIME messages appear to have a valid signature from
Key fingerprint: 3FDD CDC3 F146 3309 7FEE F699 19C1 9D85 1C0B 95E5
So whatever problem
On 09/13/2013 08:10 AM, Bob Williams wrote:
Should I create a new revocation certificate if I change my
passphrase? Or is the passphrase only 'local' to my secring.gpg?
Your old revocation certificate will still work. Both the revocation
certificate and the public part of your key can be
On 07/15/2013 02:37 PM, Klearchos-Angelos Gkountras wrote:
I am using Debian Sid and icedove as my personal email programm and I
didn't install enigmail via repos but with icedove's add-ons manager .
Please describe in which branch of debian is the problem ;)
This goes against the general
On 07/15/2013 04:34 PM, Ximin Luo wrote:
For xul-ext-gnome-keyring, I am building the extension twice, against both
xulrunner-dev *and* icedove-dev, then packaging both binaries into the same
XUL extension and using the appId to tell XPCOM to conditionally load the
correct one. Have a look
On 05/29/2013 04:54 PM, Eduard Christian Dumitrescu wrote:
One way (as discussed in a private exchange with dkg and others) would
be to only show the signed parts of signed messages and ignore
whatever isn't signed. If a particular message doesn't display
properly, one only has to temporarily
On 05/23/2013 12:56 PM, Andy Ruddock wrote:
The message just sent to enigmail-users@enigmail.net didn't verify on
my SeaMonkey/Enigmail Wheezy install.
I see a mail with three attachments, one of which is signature.asc
yes, exactly. this is http://bugs.debian.org/679640 , which i am not
sure
);
ipcBuffer.open(-1, false);
---BeginMessage---
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 21.05.13 23:28, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
On 05/05/2013 11:55 AM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
I looked again into this. The Enigmail code has changed quite a
lot since v1.4 and there is no patch
On 05/04/2013 11:01 AM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
Grant, do you read this mailing list via Gmane (i.e. via a NNTP
newsgroups server)? If yes, then it's no surprise that Enigmail won't
detect Daniel's signature: some of the required functionality to
detect PGP/MIME messages are not available in
On 05/04/2013 12:13 PM, David wrote:
If I may ask why does Debian offer such an old version of Icedove (same
as TBird 10 when the current release is 17.0.5) and such an old version
of Enigmail (1.4.1) when the current release is 1.5.1?
For the stable version of debian, we offer long-term
On 05/04/2013 01:25 PM, David wrote:
I see. So does that mean that any security 'fixes' have been
backported? Or just are they just ignored?
Security concerns are not ignored; the goal of any stable release is to
maintain a stable set of features and functionality (and APIs and ABIs)
while
On 05/01/2013 08:40 PM, Grant wrote:
On 05/01/2013 01:27 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
Grant, if you can give us any hints about what the problem was (or
even better, what specific resolution you needed), that would be a
great help to anyone else who might run into the same thing
On 04/19/2013 02:33 AM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
I can certainly do that. However, what would it change? I could still
identify a message created by Enigmail, and I could still tell you if
some other product would have faked a message to look like Enigmail.
Things like line wrapping of the
hi enigmail folks--
package/mimeEncrypt.js contains two hardcoded references to enig2 that
are used to create the MIME boundaries when using PGP/MIME.
In many circumstances it is not a problem to leak the information that
the mail sender is using enigmail specifically, but there are some users
On 03/15/2013 12:23 AM, Patrick Fleming wrote:
I have Mozilla provided Thunderbird and Enigmail as a plugin on Debian -
could not get Debian's Iceweasel to work properly.
I think you mean icedove, not iceweasel, right? iceweasel is a web
browser, not a mail user agent. enigmail only works
On Thu 2013-01-31 15:46:32 -0500, Ludwig Hügelschäfer wrote:
Some prominent MUAs are known to not be able to cope with
PGP/MIME.
If a prominent MUA cannot deal with PGP/MIME, please name it
explicitly, so we can pressure its vendor or authors to fix it (or, in
the case of free software, so we
On 01/20/2013 11:21 AM, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
On 20.01.13 16:58, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
fwiw, 'use strict'; appears 6 times in enigmail, while 'use
strict;' appears twice:
Ah, sorry. You're right - my memory played tricks with me ;-)
I guess i had the advantage of complete
On 01/17/2013 04:42 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
this patch should offer no significant surprises, as it just cleans up
some cruft that has drifted into the javascript over the years
i didn't see any followup on this patch -- is there a problem with it?
I think doing this sort of lint-y
On 01/14/2013 02:43 PM, soportek wrote:
When I attempt to send a signed or signed and encypted e-mail from my
account I receive the following error.
Send operation aborted.
Key 0xABCDEF01 not found or not valid. The (sub-)key might have expired.
i don't think this is your actual keyid.
On 01/14/2013 07:07 PM, David wrote:
Do I understand correctly that Enigmail is now written in Java code?
Does Enigmail require Java to 'run'? I ask because Oracle is not doing
so well with Java lately.
no, Enigmail does not use Java. All versions of Enigmail use Javascript
(which is an
201 - 238 of 238 matches
Mail list logo
