From: Andrew Berry
>
> Here is a message signed with Thunderbird 2 on Windows (ugh...).
>
> --Andrew
Andrew,
I received that with no problem. There is also a button in the corner I
have never seen before that reveals the signature on this message is
Valid and Trusted.
In response to your earli
Oliver Fromme wrote:
Paul Schmehl wrote:
> [...]
> By default, it appears that Mailman does not do content filtering. It also has
> pass rules (if filtering is enabled) for multipart/mixed, multipart/alternative
> and text/plain. So, it's possible that MIMEDefang is the culprit instead.
Paul Schmehl wrote:
> [...]
> By default, it appears that Mailman does not do content filtering. It also
> has
> pass rules (if filtering is enabled) for multipart/mixed,
> multipart/alternative
> and text/plain. So, it's possible that MIMEDefang is the culprit instead.
It's documented
--On Wednesday, June 11, 2008 13:13:42 -0400 Andrew Berry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is a message signed with Thunderbird 2 on Windows (ugh...).
And it came through fine.
From: Andrew Berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Referen
Here is a message signed with Thunderbird 2 on Windows (ugh...).
--Andrew
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Ian Smith wrote:
However, what normally happens to attachments to questions@, at least to
digests, is that they get stripped with a note pointing to the original
attachment, as this subsequent message from Chad illustrates:
Which makes sense - attachments don't clog up the list, and people can
t: Re: Problems opening mail on this list
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 15:32:45 -0600 Chad Perrin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 03:34:59PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>> --On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 16:23:32 -0400 Andrew Berry
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME.
However, what normally happens to attachments to questions@, at least to
digests, is that they get stripped with a note pointing to the original
attachment, as this subsequent message from Chad illustrates:
> Message: 27
> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:32:45 -0600
> From: Chad
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 15:32:45 -0600 Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
My PGP signatures seem to come through just fine, however.
Here's a test of my sig.
--
Paul Schmehl
As if it wasn't already obvious,
my opinions are my own and not
those of my employer.
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 15:32:45 -0600 Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 03:34:59PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 16:23:32 -0400 Andrew Berry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10-Jun-08, at 1:07 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>
>> Andrew, maybe
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 03:34:59PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 16:23:32 -0400 Andrew Berry
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On 10-Jun-08, at 1:07 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> >
> >>Andrew, maybe you could send a signed message, state in the body
> >>that it was signed,
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 16:23:32 -0400 Andrew Berry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10-Jun-08, at 1:07 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Andrew, maybe you could send a signed message, state in the body
that it was signed, and then I can look at the headers and tell you
what's going on.
Here is a me
On 10-Jun-08, at 1:07 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
Andrew, maybe you could send a signed message, state in the body
that it was signed, and then I can look at the headers and tell you
what's going on.
Here is a message which has been signed.
--Andrew
On 10-Jun-08, at 11:49 AM, RW wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:37:48 -0400
"Bob McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have gotten several messages on this list from an Andrew Barry
which
Lookout cannot open.
I don't see any posts with that name in this list. Could they be spam?
Typo on my
On 10-Jun-08, at 1:07 PM, Paul Schmehl wrote:
The message that Andrew sent in response to you did not have a
digital signature on it. I don't know if that means it was stripped
by the list software or he didn't sign the message.
I disabled signing when sending that message, just so my resp
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 13:00:13 -0400 Bob McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Andrew,
I have Outlook/Office 2003 SP3 with an Exchange server. Unfortunately,
that means I do not have access to the raw messages, nor can I look at
the full set of footers. Someone suggested your signature ma
your messages, so their SPAM filter appears to be blocking you.
Bob McConnell
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Berry [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:50 AM
To: Bob McConnell
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Problems opening mail on this list
On 10-Jun
--On Tuesday, June 10, 2008 11:37:48 -0400 Bob McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I have gotten several messages on this list from an Andrew Barry which
Lookout cannot open. The error message is "Can't open this item. Your
Digital ID name can not be found by the underlying security system." C
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:37:48 -0400
"Bob McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have gotten several messages on this list from an Andrew Barry which
> Lookout cannot open.
I don't see any posts with that name in this list. Could they be spam?
___
fre
On 10-Jun-08, at 11:37 AM, Bob McConnell wrote:
I have gotten several messages on this list from an Andrew Barry which
Lookout cannot open. The error message is "Can't open this item. Your
Digital ID name can not be found by the underlying security system."
Can
anyone tell me what is causing
20 matches
Mail list logo
