mutt and gpg in command line

[Alain Reymond]

Hello,

mutt 1.5.21 under Centos 7
gpg 2.0.22 under Centos 7

I have been trying to send encrypted messages via mutt in command line.
The email arrives at destination but is never encrypted.
If I send the same thing using mutt interactively, the message arrives
encrypted.

Any idea where I could do something wrong ?

I use the following configuration :

set pgp_decode_command="gpg %?p?--passphrase-fd 0? --no-verbose --batch
--output - %f"
set pgp_verify_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --verify %s %f"
set pgp_decrypt_command="gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --no-verbose --batch
--output - %f"
set pgp_sign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output -
--passphrase-fd 0 --armor --detach-sign --textmode %?a?-u %a? %f"
set pgp_clearsign_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --output -
--passphrase-fd 0 --armor --textmode --clearsign %?a?-u %a? %f"
set pgp_encrypt_only_command="pgpewrap gpg --batch --quiet --no-verbose
--output - --encrypt --textmode --armor --always-trust --encrypt-to
0xMyKey -- -r %r -- %f"
set pgp_encrypt_sign_command="pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --batch
--quiet --no-verbose --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a?
--armor --always-trust --encrypt-to 0xMyKey -- -r %r -- %f"
set pgp_import_command="gpg --no-verbose --import -v %f"
set pgp_export_command="gpg --no-verbose --export --armor %r"
set pgp_verify_key_command="gpg --no-verbose --batch --fingerprint
--check-sigs %r"

set pgp_use_gpg_agent = yes
set pgp_sign_as = 0xMyKey
set pgp_timeout = 3600
set crypt_autosign = yes
set crypt_replyencrypt = yes
set crypt_autoencrypt=yes

send-hook "~f m...@email.com" set pgp_sign_as=0xMyKey

set from="Me"
set smtp_url="smtp://u...@skynet.be@relay.skynet.be:587/"
set smtp_pass="mypasswd"

Any help would be appreciated !

Thank you

Regards,

Alain

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Niels Kobschaetzki]

On 30/06 16:47, Jon LaBadie wrote:

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11:53PM +0200, jonas hedman wrote:

On 15-06-30 22:00:27, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote:
 Hi,

 is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
 for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
 S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
 choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
 people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
 So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
 recommend?

 Thanks,
 Niels

Hi!

I use send-hooks for this for examples
send-hook someonewhoperfersinlinecry...@mail.com set pgp_autoinline; set 
pgp_autoencrypt

While I have S/Mime as standard in my default crypto settings.



For configuration ease, so as not to have lots of send-hooks,
could you do something like:

set my_PersonsWhoUsePGP = \
   pers...@email1.com,\
   pers...@email2.com,\
 ...
   pers...@emailn.com

send-hook $my_PersonsWhoUsePGP set pgp_autoinline; set pgp_autoencrypt


Thanks a lot. Your suggestions look really good :)

Niels

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Cameron Simpson]

On 01Jul2015 20:12, Ian Zimmerman i...@buug.org wrote:

On 2015-07-02 12:20 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:

I keep a little maildb which assigns group names to addresses, and
autogenerate mutt aliases formed like the above from it. Why the
maildb?  Because my mail filing also uses these groups in its rules.


Excuse my ignorance, but what is a maildb?  Just a Berkeley DB file or
similar with emails and groups?  Or?


Ah, sorry, it is a thing of my own. But any external-to-mutt db might do if it 
lets you tag or group addresses. Mine is a particular flavour of CSV, with an 
associated tool and some handy edit tools. My mailfiler knows how to consult 
it, so I get to use these groups in mail filing and also in mutt config.


Cheers,
Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au

It looked good-natured, she thought;  Still it had very long claws and a
great many teeth, so she felt it ought to be treated with respect.

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Ian Zimmerman]

On 2015-07-02 12:20 +1000, Cameron Simpson wrote:

 I keep a little maildb which assigns group names to addresses, and
 autogenerate mutt aliases formed like the above from it. Why the
 maildb?  Because my mail filing also uses these groups in its rules.

Excuse my ignorance, but what is a maildb?  Just a Berkeley DB file or
similar with emails and groups?  Or?

-- 
Please *no* private copies of mailing list or newsgroup messages.
Rule 420: All persons more than eight miles high to leave the court.

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Cameron Simpson]

On 30Jun2015 16:47, Jon LaBadie mut...@jgcomp.com wrote:

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11:53PM +0200, jonas hedman wrote:

On 15-06-30 22:00:27, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote:
 is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
 for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
 S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
 choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
 people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
 So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
 recommend?

I use send-hooks for this for examples
send-hook someonewhoperfersinlinecry...@mail.com set pgp_autoinline; set 
pgp_autoencrypt
While I have S/Mime as standard in my default crypto settings.


For configuration ease, so as not to have lots of send-hooks,
could you do something like:

set my_PersonsWhoUsePGP = \
   pers...@email1.com,\
   pers...@email2.com,\
 ...
   pers...@emailn.com

send-hook $my_PersonsWhoUsePGP set pgp_autoinline; set pgp_autoencrypt


A cleaner solution might be to reframe the above like this:

 alias -group pgpers pgpers pers...@email1.com, pers...@email2.com, ...

 send-hook '%C pgpers' 'set pgp_autoinline; set pgp_autoencrypt'

I suggest this for two reasons. First, address groups seem a much cleaner 
system for talking about groups of addresses and second, I use them 
aggressively!  I keep a little maildb which assigns group names to addresses, 
and autogenerate mutt aliases formed like the above from it. Why the maildb?  
Because my mail filing also uses these groups in its rules.


As a real world example, I use this in my muttrc for HTML:

 message-hook . 'unalternative_order *; alternative_order text/plain text/html'
 # Apple Mail embeds attachments in the HTML part instead of outside the 
multipart/mixed
 message-hook '~h X-Mailer: Apple Mail ~X 1-' 'unalternative_order *; 
alternative_order text/html multipart/mixed text/plain'
 message-hook '%f htmlers | ~f @no-re...@cc.yahoo-inc.com | ~f @outlook.com | 
~f live.com | ~f @facebookmail.com' 'unalternative_order *; alternative_order 
text/html text/plain'

That final message-hook selects HTML in preference for messages from people in 
my htmlers mutt group.


Cheers,
Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au

When Microsoft Office is your only hammer, pretty much everything begins to
look like a nail. Or a thumb. - Rob Pegoraro

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[jonas hedman]

On 15-06-30 22:00:27, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote:
 Hi,
 
 is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
 for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
 S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
 choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
 people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
 So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
 recommend?
 
 Thanks,
 Niels

Hi!

I use send-hooks for this for examples
send-hook someonewhoperfersinlinecry...@mail.com set pgp_autoinline; set 
pgp_autoencrypt

While I have S/Mime as standard in my default crypto settings.

/jonas


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Jon LaBadie]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11:53PM +0200, jonas hedman wrote:
 On 15-06-30 22:00:27, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote:
  Hi,
  
  is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
  for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
  S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
  choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
  people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
  So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
  recommend?
  
  Thanks,
  Niels
 
 Hi!
 
 I use send-hooks for this for examples
 send-hook someonewhoperfersinlinecry...@mail.com set pgp_autoinline; set 
 pgp_autoencrypt
 
 While I have S/Mime as standard in my default crypto settings.
 

For configuration ease, so as not to have lots of send-hooks,
could you do something like:

set my_PersonsWhoUsePGP = \
pers...@email1.com,\
pers...@email2.com,\
  ...
pers...@emailn.com

send-hook $my_PersonsWhoUsePGP set pgp_autoinline; set pgp_autoencrypt

I don't have that need, but I'm curious for other similar purposes.

Jon
-- 
Jon H. LaBadie j...@jgcomp.com
 11226 South Shore Rd.  (703) 787-0688 (H)
 Reston, VA  20190  (703) 935-6720 (C)

mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Niels Kobschaetzki]

Hi,

is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
recommend?

Thanks,
Niels

Re: mutt with GPG and S/Mime

[Peter P.]

* Jon LaBadie mut...@jgcomp.com [2015-06-30 16:53]:
 On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:11:53PM +0200, jonas hedman wrote:
  On 15-06-30 22:00:27, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote:
   Hi,
   
   is it possible to use with one account PGP and S/Mime? I found a how-to
   for using S/Mime or using mutt with one account with PGP and one account
   S/Mime. But I want to use my main account with both and would like to
   choose on a per user basis whether I encrypt via PGP or S/Mime. I know
   people who use only PGP and others only S/Mime.
   So: is this possible in mutt? If yes, how - any how-tos you can
   recommend?
   
   Thanks,
   Niels
  
  Hi!
  
  I use send-hooks for this for examples
  send-hook someonewhoperfersinlinecry...@mail.com set pgp_autoinline; set 
  pgp_autoencrypt
  
  While I have S/Mime as standard in my default crypto settings.
  
 
 For configuration ease, so as not to have lots of send-hooks,
 could you do something like:
 
 set my_PersonsWhoUsePGP = \
 pers...@email1.com,\
 pers...@email2.com,\
   ...
 pers...@emailn.com
 
 send-hook $my_PersonsWhoUsePGP set pgp_autoinline; set pgp_autoencrypt
 
 I don't have that need, but I'm curious for other similar purposes.
Thank you, this is a great contribution!

I am also curious if the above solution would be able to distinguish
between mails that are sent to the pers...@email1.com (who uses PGP)
only and exclusively, and between mails that get sent to others in CC:
as well.

best, 
P

Mutt v GPG: 'public key already present' and other questions

[dsjkvf]

Dear colleagues,


I would be grateful if someone could confirm if I've done everything right:

a). I'm using Mutt 1.5.18 on Mac OS X 10.5.8 with gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.9
b). Here is a fragment from my .muttrc:
---
set pgp_decode_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   %?p?--passphrase-fd 0?
--no-verbose --quiet  --batch  --output - %f
set pgp_verify_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --quiet
--batch  --output - --verify %s %f
set pgp_decrypt_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --passphrase-fd 0
--no-verbose --quiet  --batch  --output - %f
set pgp_sign_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg--no-verbose --batch
--quiet   --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --detach-sign
--textmode %?a?-u %a? %f
set pgp_clearsign_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --batch
--quiet   --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --textmode --clearsign
%?a?-u %a? %f
set pgp_encrypt_only_command=pgpewrap /opt/local/bin/gpg--batch
--quiet  --no-verbose --output - --encrypt --textmode --armor
--always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap /opt/local/bin/gpg
--passphrase-fd 0  --batch --quiet  --no-verbose  --textmode --output
- --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
set pgp_import_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg  --no-verbose --import -v %f
set pgp_export_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --export --armor %r
set pgp_verify_key_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --verbose --batch
--fingerprint --check-sigs %r
set pgp_list_pubring_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose
--batch --quiet   --with-colons --list-keys %r
set pgp_list_secring_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose
--batch --quiet   --with-colons --list-secret-keys %r
set pgp_autosign = yes
set pgp_autoencrypt = yes
set pgp_sign_as=0xEC0E4D22# This is my the only one public key,
which is paired with my the only one private key
set pgp_show_unusable = no
...
my_hdr Cc: my-ot...@adress# I email a copy of every letter to my
other address
---
c). Now, I compose an email To: s...@address (and Cc: my-ot...@address
is automatically added). I see in the letter's window that 'PGP' is
set to 'Sign, Encrypt (PGP/MIME)' and 'sign as' is set to '0xEC0E4D22'
-- so, everything looks nice, exactly according to the .muttrc.
d). Then I press 'y', and Mutt asks me to 'Enter keyID for
s...@address: '. And here goes question No. 1: Why? I have the only
one key, which is listed in .muttrc, so, shouldn't Mutt just take it
automatically?
e). However, I press Enter, Mutt shows me my pubic key, I do select it
by pressing Enter again (and, actually, I have no other choice), and
then the history repeats, and Mutt asks me for the key for
'my-ot...@address' (which is listed in Cc:).
6. So, I do press Enter-Enter once again, Mutt asks me for PGP
passphrase, I enter it, and then gpg says 'gpg: 0xEC0E4D22: skipped:
public key already present', and that is my question No. 2: what does
this phrase mean, why does it appear, and how can I avoid it?
7. After it my email flies encrypted to both addresses, so, there
seems to be no error, but just to many additional keypresses :). And I
would be very grateful if you could help me avoid [some of] them :).


Sincerely yours,


-- 
dsjkvf

Re: Mutt v GPG: 'public key already present' and other questions

[dsjkvf]

Sorry :)


As I see, I was quite stupid, unfortunately.

My email should be encrypted not with my public key, of course, but
with public keys received from addressees. That's why I was suggested
to select keys (question No. 1) , and that's why I gpg has told me
that the key was already present (there should be two different public
keys) (question No. 2).

Am I right? If so -- then, please, forgive me for disturbing you :).


Sincerely yours,


-- 
dsjkvf



On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 13:15, dsjkvf dsj...@gmail.com wrote:
 Dear colleagues,


 I would be grateful if someone could confirm if I've done everything right:

 a). I'm using Mutt 1.5.18 on Mac OS X 10.5.8 with gpg (GnuPG) 1.4.9
 b). Here is a fragment from my .muttrc:
 ---
 set pgp_decode_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   %?p?--passphrase-fd 0?
 --no-verbose --quiet  --batch  --output - %f
 set pgp_verify_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --quiet
 --batch  --output - --verify %s %f
 set pgp_decrypt_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --passphrase-fd 0
 --no-verbose --quiet  --batch  --output - %f
 set pgp_sign_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg    --no-verbose --batch
 --quiet   --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --detach-sign
 --textmode %?a?-u %a? %f
 set pgp_clearsign_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --batch
 --quiet   --output - --passphrase-fd 0 --armor --textmode --clearsign
 %?a?-u %a? %f
 set pgp_encrypt_only_command=pgpewrap /opt/local/bin/gpg    --batch
 --quiet  --no-verbose --output - --encrypt --textmode --armor
 --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
 set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap /opt/local/bin/gpg
 --passphrase-fd 0  --batch --quiet  --no-verbose  --textmode --output
 - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
 set pgp_import_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg  --no-verbose --import -v %f
 set pgp_export_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose --export --armor %r
 set pgp_verify_key_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --verbose --batch
 --fingerprint --check-sigs %r
 set pgp_list_pubring_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose
 --batch --quiet   --with-colons --list-keys %r
 set pgp_list_secring_command=/opt/local/bin/gpg   --no-verbose
 --batch --quiet   --with-colons --list-secret-keys %r
 set pgp_autosign = yes
 set pgp_autoencrypt = yes
 set pgp_sign_as=0xEC0E4D22    # This is my the only one public key,
 which is paired with my the only one private key
 set pgp_show_unusable = no
 ...
 my_hdr Cc: my-ot...@adress    # I email a copy of every letter to my
 other address
 ---
 c). Now, I compose an email To: s...@address (and Cc: my-ot...@address
 is automatically added). I see in the letter's window that 'PGP' is
 set to 'Sign, Encrypt (PGP/MIME)' and 'sign as' is set to '0xEC0E4D22'
 -- so, everything looks nice, exactly according to the .muttrc.
 d). Then I press 'y', and Mutt asks me to 'Enter keyID for
 s...@address: '. And here goes question No. 1: Why? I have the only
 one key, which is listed in .muttrc, so, shouldn't Mutt just take it
 automatically?
 e). However, I press Enter, Mutt shows me my pubic key, I do select it
 by pressing Enter again (and, actually, I have no other choice), and
 then the history repeats, and Mutt asks me for the key for
 'my-ot...@address' (which is listed in Cc:).
 6. So, I do press Enter-Enter once again, Mutt asks me for PGP
 passphrase, I enter it, and then gpg says 'gpg: 0xEC0E4D22: skipped:
 public key already present', and that is my question No. 2: what does
 this phrase mean, why does it appear, and how can I avoid it?
 7. After it my email flies encrypted to both addresses, so, there
 seems to be no error, but just to many additional keypresses :). And I
 would be very grateful if you could help me avoid [some of] them :).


 Sincerely yours,


 --
 dsjkvf

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

hello,

 now i have spent some additional hours on this problem which might
 turn out to be some idiot fault of the person behind the keyboard. 

unfortunately this was the case. i was stuck up on pressing s instead of p
when i wanted to use gpg. it is *very* embarrassing and i apologize sincerely
for the noise.

i did learn a few things on the way though.

jan

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Chuck Smith]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 08:58:21PM +0100, Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:
 hello,
 
  now i have spent some additional hours on this problem which might
  turn out to be some idiot fault of the person behind the keyboard. 
 
 unfortunately this was the case. i was stuck up on pressing s instead of p
 when i wanted to use gpg. it is *very* embarrassing and i apologize sincerely
 for the noise.
 
 i did learn a few things on the way though.
 
 jan

No reason to apologize. I think we all learned something with you. I
know I did. 

--
Chuck Smith



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Hello Niels,

Niels den Otter wrote on 17.03.10:
 
  any hints are much needed...
 
 Just to be sure. You are opening an e-mail that is signed/encrypted
 with PGP and not with S/MIME?

I am able to decrypt stored gpg encrypted messages. And replying to one of
these messages also works fine. (I have: 
set pgp_replyencrypt=yes 
and 
set crypt_replysignencrypted)

but to manually sign and/or encrypt causes the problems - 

generally i have only ever used gpg and hadn't known more than the name of
S/MIME. So i don't know where i could even tell mutt to use it.
  
 
 Is the mime-type for the signature correct or is the PGP signature
 inline?

I think that is correct but i am not sure i understand where to configure
this. (.mailcap (?) has nothing concerning this)

thanks for helping

jan

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Hello Chuck,

thanks for taking the time.

Chuck Smith wrote on 17.03.10:
 
 I was looking around for a fix for you and found something interesting.
 Look at the Mutt User Manual in the section on PGP:
 
 http://wiki.mutt.org/?MuttGuide/UseGPG
 
 Look carefully at the this command:
 
 set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --batch
 --quiet --no-verbose --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a?
 --armor --always-trust --encrypt-to 0xC9C40C31 -- -r %r -- %f

I think that tells gpg to also encrypt to the writers pub-key, so that he is
able to read the sent mails. I have 

encrypt-to myID 

in .gnupg/options 

to take care of that (that explains my initial confusion of why i could read
files encrypted to somebody else).

cheers 

jan

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

dear mutt-users,

Probably my question was too imprecise.
Jan-Herbert Damm wrote on 16.03.10:
 hello all,
 
 gpg and mutt used to work fine. now mutt won't find any public keys anymore. I
 have run the following tests:
[...]

now i have spent some additional hours on this problem which might
turn out to be some idiot fault of the person behind the keyboard. 

I think i have narrowed it down a bit. For some reason mutt doesn't seem to
call gpg at all - and it might have to do with this error message (which i get
if i just want to sign but not encrypt a mail)

/home/jan/.smime/keys/.index: No such file or directory (errno = 2)

I don't remember ever having a directory .smime/. 

any hints are much needed...

jan
 
 
 beginn gpg-test--- 
 j...@herb:~$ cat test.txt
 this is the content of test.txt
 
 j...@herb:~$ gpg -se -r Markus test.txt
 
 [prompted to enter my passphase]
 
 pub  2048g/0F663F56 2009-07-17 Markus Dxxx x...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de
 
 [...]
 
 j...@herb:~$ gpg -d test.txt.gpg
 
 [prompted to enter my passphase]
 
 gpg: verschlüsselt mit 2048-Bit ELG-E Schlüssel, ID 0F663F56, erzeugt
 2009-07-17
   Markus Dxxx x...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de
   gpg: verschlüsselt mit 2048-Bit ELG-E Schlüssel, ID A9EEDA47, erzeugt
   2008-11-30
 Jan-Herbert Damm (email-verschlüsselung) jan-h-d...@web.de
 
 this is the content of test.txt
 
 [...]
 end gpg-tests
 
 Thus i reckon that gpg is working, though i am confused why i can decrypt the
 testfile when i encrypted it with somebody elses pub-key.
 
 In my muttrc I have:
 
 ---beginn muttrc---
 set pgp_timeout=1800
 set pgp_replyencrypt=yes
 set pgp_sign_as=FA5B6661
 set crypt_replyencrypt=yes  
 set crypt_replysignencrypted
 source /etc/Muttrc.d/gpg.rc 
 end muttrc---
 
 gpg.rc is is a standard ubuntu preinstalled file which has worked before. It
 contains this line that seems to not be working correctly:
 
 set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=/usr/lib/mutt/pgpewrap gpg %?p?--passphrase-fd
 0? --batch --quiet --no-verbose --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u
 %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
 
 I am at a loss of how to go about analyzing what's going wrong here. If
 someone could tell me what else to try i am very grateful.
 
 jan
 

-- 

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Dale Raby]

I'm not an expert, but shouldn't mutt call  /home/jan/.gnupg?



-- 
Nothing is ever so bad that it couldn't be worse, and if it could be
worse than it is, then maybe its not so bad!

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Hello,

Dale Raby wrote on 17.03.10:
 I'm not an expert, but shouldn't mutt call  /home/jan/.gnupg?
Indeed! Unfortunately I have no idea how mutt generates the commands for
encryption. 

In muttrc i can't find any hint to s/mime. The variable pgp_sign_command is
set to a sensible gpg command. It is obviously not triggered. But Why??


jan (fighting with frustration)

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Niels den Otter]

Dear Jan,

On Wednesday, 17 March 2010, Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:
  gpg and mutt used to work fine. now mutt won't find any public
  keys anymore. I have run the following tests:
 [...]
 
 now i have spent some additional hours on this problem which might
 turn out to be some idiot fault of the person behind the keyboard. 
 
 I think i have narrowed it down a bit. For some reason mutt doesn't seem to
 call gpg at all - and it might have to do with this error message (which i get
 if i just want to sign but not encrypt a mail)
 
 /home/jan/.smime/keys/.index: No such file or directory (errno = 2)
 
 I don't remember ever having a directory .smime/. 
 
 any hints are much needed...

Just to be sure. You are opening an e-mail that is signed/encrypted
with PGP and not with S/MIME?

Is the mime-type for the signature correct or is the PGP signature
inline?


-- Niels


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: mutt and gpg not in tune

[Chuck Smith]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 09:11:53PM +0100, Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:
 Hello,
 
 Dale Raby wrote on 17.03.10:
  I'm not an expert, but shouldn't mutt call  /home/jan/.gnupg?
 Indeed! Unfortunately I have no idea how mutt generates the commands for
 encryption. 
 
 In muttrc i can't find any hint to s/mime. The variable pgp_sign_command is
 set to a sensible gpg command. It is obviously not triggered. But Why??
 
 
 jan (fighting with frustration)

I was looking around for a fix for you and found something interesting.
Look at the Mutt User Manual in the section on PGP:

http://wiki.mutt.org/?MuttGuide/UseGPG

Look carefully at the this command:

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 --batch
--quiet --no-verbose --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a?
--armor --always-trust --encrypt-to 0xC9C40C31 -- -r %r -- %f

Notice the --encrypt-to portion. This is the only part that is different
than what you are using. I am not sure it this is helpful or not. 

--
Chuck Smith



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

mutt and gpg not in tune

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

hello all,

gpg and mutt used to work fine. now mutt won't find any public keys anymore. I
have run the following tests:


beginn gpg-test--- 
j...@herb:~$ cat test.txt
this is the content of test.txt

j...@herb:~$ gpg -se -r Markus test.txt

[prompted to enter my passphase]

pub  2048g/0F663F56 2009-07-17 Markus Dxxx x...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de

[...]

j...@herb:~$ gpg -d test.txt.gpg

[prompted to enter my passphase]

gpg: verschlüsselt mit 2048-Bit ELG-E Schlüssel, ID 0F663F56, erzeugt
2009-07-17
  Markus Dxxx x...@ari.uni-heidelberg.de
  gpg: verschlüsselt mit 2048-Bit ELG-E Schlüssel, ID A9EEDA47, erzeugt
  2008-11-30
Jan-Herbert Damm (email-verschlüsselung) jan-h-d...@web.de

this is the content of test.txt

[...]
end gpg-tests

Thus i reckon that gpg is working, though i am confused why i can decrypt the
testfile when i encrypted it with somebody elses pub-key.

In my muttrc I have:

---beginn muttrc---
set pgp_timeout=1800
set pgp_replyencrypt=yes
set pgp_sign_as=FA5B6661
set crypt_replyencrypt=yes  
set crypt_replysignencrypted
source /etc/Muttrc.d/gpg.rc 
end muttrc---

gpg.rc is is a standard ubuntu preinstalled file which has worked before. It
contains this line that seems to not be working correctly:

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=/usr/lib/mutt/pgpewrap gpg %?p?--passphrase-fd
0? --batch --quiet --no-verbose --textmode --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u
%a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

I am at a loss of how to go about analyzing what's going wrong here. If
someone could tell me what else to try i am very grateful.

jan

Re: Mutt 1.20. --GPG--

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Hi, 

  * Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:
  
   GPG asks my passphrase but doesn't accept it.
  
  What gpg setup did you use? contrib/gpg.rc? It's not gpg that's asking
  but mutt.  So maybe mutt doesn't call gpg at all or in a wrong way...

Ok, it works fine now. The problem was in the direction pointed to by Rocco:
I aktually wasn't telling mutt at all how to call gpg. I copied the run
commands from the samples/gpg.rc into my .muttrc with only slightly
detailing the path to pgpewrap.

I find that building my own mutt improved my understanding a lot because i was
forced to figure out the workings in detail. With the custom mutt install of
ubuntu on the other hand it seems that these workings are being hidden from
the user, which can lead to selling him for dumb (as the literal 
translation of a german figure of speech would phrase it).


greetings 

jan

 
 I guess I'm running into the same trap as just a few days ago: the ubuntu
 set up with the /etc/Muttrc.d/* files being sourced from /etc/Muttrc. Whereas
 my /opt/mutt/etc/Muttrc does something else.
 
 -
 $ locate gpg.rc
 /etc/Muttrc.d/gpg.rc
 /home/jan/SRC/mutt-1.5.20hg/contrib/gpg.rc
 /opt/mutt/share/doc/mutt/samples/gpg.rc
 /usr/share/doc/mutt/examples/gpg.rc
 - 
 
 Let me fumble with this for a while. I am sure the answer resides in there
 somewhere.
 
 jan, and thanks!

-- 
Bitte beachten Sie auch die Rückseite dieses Schreibens!

Mutt 1.20. --GPG--

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Hello,

Testing Mutt 1.20.

GPG asks my passphrase but doesn't accept it.

I don't really know where to start looking for figuring this out.

from config.log:
---
  $ ./configure -C --prefix=/opt/mutt --enable-pop --enable-imap\
--enable-smtp --enable-debug --with-gss --with-gnutls --with-sasl --with-idn
--enable-hcache
---

output of version:
-
 $ /opt/mutt/bin/mutt -version
Mutt 1.5.20hg (2009-06-26)
[...]
System: Linux 2.6.27-14-generic (i686)
ncurses: ncurses 5.6.20071124 (compiled with 5.6)
libidn: 1.8 (compiled with 1.8)
hcache backend: GDBM version 1.8.3. 10/15/2002 (built Jun 15 2006 21:19:27)
Einstellungen bei der Compilierung:
-DOMAIN
+DEBUG
-HOMESPOOL  +USE_SETGID  +USE_DOTLOCK  +DL_STANDALONE  +USE_FCNTL  -USE_FLOCK   
+USE_POP  +USE_IMAP  +USE_SMTP  
-USE_SSL_OPENSSL  +USE_SSL_GNUTLS  +USE_SASL  +USE_GSS  +HAVE_GETADDRINFO  
+HAVE_REGCOMP  -USE_GNU_REGEX  
+HAVE_COLOR  +HAVE_START_COLOR  +HAVE_TYPEAHEAD  +HAVE_BKGDSET  
+HAVE_CURS_SET  +HAVE_META  +HAVE_RESIZETERM  
+CRYPT_BACKEND_CLASSIC_PGP  +CRYPT_BACKEND_CLASSIC_SMIME  -CRYPT_BACKEND_GPGME  
-EXACT_ADDRESS  -SUN_ATTACHMENT  
+ENABLE_NLS  -LOCALES_HACK  +HAVE_WC_FUNCS  +HAVE_LANGINFO_CODESET  
+HAVE_LANGINFO_YESEXPR  
+HAVE_ICONV  -ICONV_NONTRANS  +HAVE_LIBIDN  +HAVE_GETSID  +USE_HCACHE  
-ISPELL
SENDMAIL=/usr/sbin/sendmail
MAILPATH=/var/mail
PKGDATADIR=/opt/mutt/share/mutt
SYSCONFDIR=/opt/mutt/etc
EXECSHELL=/bin/sh
-MIXMASTER
--snip---

PS: after make install i manually changed permissions and group of
/opt/mutt/bin/mutt_dotlock, because install failed at it:

--
$  ls -l mutt_dotlock 
-rwxr-sr-x 1 jan mail 24118 2009-06-27 16:13 mutt_dotlock
--

hints greatly appreciated

jan

Re: Mutt 1.20. --GPG--

[Rocco Rutte]

Hi,

* Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:

 GPG asks my passphrase but doesn't accept it.

What gpg setup did you use? contrib/gpg.rc? It's not gpg that's asking
but mutt.  So maybe mutt doesn't call gpg at all or in a wrong way...

Rocco


pgp7cJuKZz5L7.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Mutt 1.20. --GPG--

[Jan-Herbert Damm]

Rocco Rutte wrote on 02.07.09:
 Hi,
 
 * Jan-Herbert Damm wrote:
 
  GPG asks my passphrase but doesn't accept it.
 
 What gpg setup did you use? contrib/gpg.rc? It's not gpg that's asking
 but mutt.  So maybe mutt doesn't call gpg at all or in a wrong way...

I guess I'm running into the same trap as just a few days ago: the ubuntu
set up with the /etc/Muttrc.d/* files being sourced from /etc/Muttrc. Whereas
my /opt/mutt/etc/Muttrc does something else.

-
$ locate gpg.rc
/etc/Muttrc.d/gpg.rc
/home/jan/SRC/mutt-1.5.20hg/contrib/gpg.rc
/opt/mutt/share/doc/mutt/samples/gpg.rc
/usr/share/doc/mutt/examples/gpg.rc
- 

Let me fumble with this for a while. I am sure the answer resides in there
somewhere.

jan, and thanks!

mutt and gpg encrypting to more than one key for single recipient?

[Richard Johnson]

Hello list, I'm trying to have mutt encrypt to multiple gpg keyids at once
when I send to a single email address.

The people behind the address (it's an email reflector) all have their own
gpg and pgp keys [1].  I've not yet found a way to make encryption to all
their keys happen with mutt 1.5.18 and gpg 1.4.9, though there are hints
that others have tried to do the same thing.

Two suggestions gleaned from searching were pgp-hook in mutt and group
in gnupg.

Per the comments on what looks like pgp-hook patches for 1.2.5, this might
have worked to aggregate them (in .muttrc):
pgp-hook al...@example.com 0xdeadbeef
pgp-hook al...@example.com 0xc0dec0de
pgp-hook al...@example.com 0xcafebabe
Yet the aggregation does not happen in 1.5.18.  mutt prompts to use the
last keyid, but my selecting it with 'y' doesn't cause mutt to prompt for
the others.  Rather, it then uses gpg to encrypt to that keyid alone.

Based on other hints drawn from searching, I also attempted to use pgp-hook
this way (in .muttrc):
pgp-hook al...@example.com 0xdeadbeef 0xc0dec0de 0xcafebabe
yet mutt passes the entire list of keyids directly to gpg, which doesn't
handle a list (or command line arguments to build one) in this manner.

Digging a little deeper below mutt, I've attempted to use group in gpg
itself like this (in gpg.conf):
group al...@example.com=u1@example.com u...@example.com u...@example.com
or
group al...@example.com=0xdeadbeef 0xc0dec0de 0xcafebabe
yet in each case mutt asks for the (nonexistent) keyid for the group name
before it asks gpg to resolve the group contents.

Moving on, if I set up a mutt pgp-hook this way (in .muttrc):
pgp-hook al...@example.com alias
and a corresponding gpg group (in gpg.conf):
group alias...@example.com 0xc0dec0de u...@example.com
I end up with mutt rejecting the keyid of 'alias' before it even gets to
the point of asking gpg to resolve the group.

If I were to bite the bullet and install outside the package system, does
Dale Woolridge's multiple-crypt-hook patch get me closer to usable
encryption to multiple keys for a specific address?  If so, does it still
make any sense for mutt 1.5.18 (his last update was in 2004 for 1.5.6).

Can you suggest additional things to try?

Thanks!


Richard

[1] We cannot use a shared key or conventional encryption for mail through
the reflector, as that doesn't meet our security requirements.

Re: mutt and gpg encrypting to more than one key for single

[Derek Martin]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 08:18:28AM -0600, Richard Johnson wrote:
 The people behind the address (it's an email reflector) all have their own
 gpg and pgp keys [1].  

The best way to handle this is to have the e-mail reflector do it.
The e-mail reflector should provide a public key to which you encrypt
the mail, then it decrypts and re-encrypts to all the subscribers.
The best part of this is that the subscribers don't need to have
everyone else's keys.

One such list management software is here:

http://www.synacklabs.net/projects/crypt-ml/

It may be worth trying to get the manager of your mailing list to move
to this software, or similar.

Of course, in the general case, one would argue that exchanging
encrypted mail with people you do not know (and therefore can not
possibly trust) is rather pointless...  If your group has anything
truly worth encrypting, it's rather likely that it will be infiltrated
by exactly the sort of person you're trying to protect it from.  It
may be true that the list manager has a list of recipients, but
there's no guarantee that the list owner knows who the e-mail
addresses actually belong to, or cares.


-- 
Derek D. Martinhttp://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail due to spam prevention.  Sorry for the inconvenience.



pgplivKnpYa69.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: mutt and gpg encrypting to more than one key for single

[Richard Johnson]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:42:22PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
 On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 08:18:28AM -0600, Richard Johnson wrote:
  The people behind the address (it's an email reflector) all have their own
  gpg and pgp keys [1].  
 
 The best way to handle this is to have the e-mail reflector do it.
 The e-mail reflector should provide a public key to which you encrypt
 the mail, then it decrypts and re-encrypts to all the subscribers.
 The best part of this is that the subscribers don't need to have
 everyone else's keys.
 One such list management software is here:
 http://www.synacklabs.net/projects/crypt-ml/

Yes, I've looked at such methods.  However, that technique in general
doesn't match our security requirements.  We need end-to-end trust between
mutually shared keys, without a man in the middle.

That's why I'm trying to get mutt to do the kind of encryption to multiple
keys for a single address that everyone else on the team does in
Thunderbird with Enigmail grin.


Richard

Another mutt and gpg question

[Dan H.]

Hello,

encrypting, signing, checking signatures: all works. Sort of.

Two hassles: 

1. I can't access encrypted mail that I send. When I try to read
   it, I get Could not copy message.

2. when I receive an encrypted mail, I see a text block of gibberish that
   I have to manually pipe through GPG externally. Why doesn't mutt
   auto-detect encrypted mails, like it does with signed mails?

Thanks,
--D.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Another mutt and gpg question

[Nicolas Rachinsky]

* Dan H. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-01-28 14:28 +0100]:
Content-Description: kjlkj

???

 1. I can't access encrypted mail that I send. When I try to read
it, I get Could not copy message.

See the thread starting with
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Nicolas

-- 
http://www.rachinsky.de/nicolas

Re: Another mutt and gpg question

[Kyle Wheeler]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Monday, January 28 at 02:28 PM, quoth Dan H.:
1. I can't access encrypted mail that I send. When I try to read
   it, I get Could not copy message.

That's by design (but it's a rather uninformative error message). 
Encrypted email can only be read by those who have the private key to 
decrypt it. In order to read encrypted mail that you send you have to 
either 1) encrypt it to yourself as well (you can do this by changing 
gpg's configuration, or by adding --encrypt-to with your own PGP key 
to all of the mutt encryption commands in your muttrc) or 2) set 
fcc_clear, so that sent messages are saved to your Sent box 
unencrypted.

2. when I receive an encrypted mail, I see a text block of gibberish that
   I have to manually pipe through GPG externally. Why doesn't mutt
   auto-detect encrypted mails, like it does with signed mails?

set pgp_auto_decode=yes

At this point (i.e. now that you're at the it'd be more convenient 
if...), I strongly recommend reading through the muttrc man page. 
You'll find all *kinds* of interesting and useful settings in there.

~Kyle
- -- 
No matter what side of the argument you are on, you always find people 
on your side that you wish were on the other.
  -- Jascha Heifetz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!

iD8DBQFHnfFQBkIOoMqOI14RAorhAJ9xC0C80Gu8rZJB9fveUmW88O9uOQCg+mkI
8bQ23BGNyHevx0bpzD9QCNQ=
=CNM7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Mutt and GPG: how to manually verify the signature of a message?

[Alain Bench]

Hello Stefano,

 On Monday, April 16, 2007 at 12:01:57 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:

 the body of the mail (which is supposedly the part which is signed).

There's more signed: The MIME part mini-header, the empty head/body
separator line, and of course the body. Everything between the MIME part
--separator lines, themselves excluded.


Bye!Alain.
-- 
Mutt muttrc tip to send mails in best adapted first necessary and sufficient
charset (version for Western Latin-1/Latin-9/CP-850/CP-1252 terminal users):
set send_charset=us-ascii:iso-8859-1:iso-8859-15:windows-1252:utf-8

Re: Mutt and GPG: how to manually verify the signature of a

[Kyle Wheeler]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Sunday, April 15 at 01:45 AM, quoth Stefano Sabatini:
 Hi to all mutters, and sorry for the likely dumb question I'm posting.

No prob; this may be a dumb answer.

 I'm testing mutt and gnupg, I can verify with no problem messages 
 signatures, but it fails when I do it manually, saving in distinct 
 files the message and the signature.

 For example if I save the (clear) message in message, and the 
 signature in signature.asc, then the command:

 gpg --verify signature.asc message

The message *body* or the message itself? Generally the message 
includes all sorts of things (headers and such) that are not part of 
what gets signed.

~Kyle
- -- 
To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that 
we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only 
unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American 
public.
-- Theodore Roosevelt, 1912
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: Thank you for using encryption!

iD8DBQFGIyE0BkIOoMqOI14RApVRAJ9FigIvfeN8Hj9EUD6mLF62C2M1IACfSvES
/PUMuJRJVPy5O0ulIGktALs=
=KgJF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Mutt and GPG: how to manually verify the signature of a message?

[Stefano Sabatini]

On date Monday 2007-04-16 01:09:40 -0600, Kyle Wheeler muttered:
 On Sunday, April 15 at 01:45 AM, quoth Stefano Sabatini:
 [...]
  I'm testing mutt and gnupg, I can verify with no problem messages 
  signatures, but it fails when I do it manually, saving in distinct 
  files the message and the signature.
 
  For example if I save the (clear) message in message, and the 
  signature in signature.asc, then the command:
 
  gpg --verify signature.asc message
 
 The message *body* or the message itself? Generally the message 
 includes all sorts of things (headers and such) that are not part of 
 what gets signed.

Sorry if I've not been very clear.

I'm considering multipart/signed attatchments. In order to save the
different parts of the attachment, I'm using the mutt attachment menu,
I save the text/plain and the application/pgp-signature in different
files (respectively message and signature.asc), so the message file
only contains the body of the mail (which is supposedly the part which
is signed).

Cheers
-- 
Stefano Sabatini
Linux user number 337176 (see http://counter.li.org)

Mutt and GPG: how to manually verify the signature of a message?

[Stefano Sabatini]

Hi to all mutters, and sorry for the likely dumb question I'm posting.

I'm testing mutt and gnupg, I can verify with no problem messages
signatures, but it fails when I do it manually, saving in distinct
files the message and the signature.

For example if I save the (clear) message in message, and the
signature in signature.asc, then the command:

gpg --verify signature.asc message

issues a bad signature message.

I have setted:
set pgp_verify_command=gpg --no-verbose --batch --output - --verify %s %f
in the configuration.

With no doubt there is on my a part a big misunderstanding of how gpg
works, and after much thinkering I'm definitively puzzled.
So, which is the correct way to verify by hand the signature of a
message?

Many thanks in advance.
Cheers
-- 
Stefano Sabatini
Linux user number 337176 (see http://counter.li.org)

Mutt mixmaster gpg pgp

[gab bag]

I'm using mutt with mixmaster and gnupg all fine apart from mixmaster .If i 
send a mail not forwarded by any mix 
chai the mail get delivered right with content , pgp signature and everithing 
.If i send it through a mix chai it 
gets delivered reporting only the pgp signature and no content,i'm not such a 
gnupg experct so why is that ? Thank 
you! If i'd send this mail through a mix chain you wouldn't have read anything 
and is this actual mail correct ? 
-- 
http://tor.gabrix.ath.cx

Key fingerprint = 7AD2 BCB4 B9BF 1303 FE84  8D3A 0737 6A53 58CA 4C6C
-BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

mQGhBEXHIOARBAC/s2H3Nj8ewRy64x6KGQ9Q+QYx7zuQUGGrwdjW6wGRJwjzemnn
DEelpdmNwyMaw+e6Z0jR03Luw0j9IC7mp+R7LxU1FdvCRR77Bv9QP2vStv9txWN8
4H7I63H5gzZ7WAec0n2g2KPPlsQoCOMW699BECgFyQRPs5yDVK+MPIbqxwCg2soK
lN/c04cyDao0ShJzp2ooTyED/RU7b1mdGVCS0B/4X/w9qGP65QKt4429dhBn0ABH
6s9ONLdRowGAeZliDJosX1d2+hg10dgDalgLCCeJPwROwlEvmDPhEgs9EoB7Kg08
XUCUuT6zsc7reELLJ/y13J1iXZjzLbDaY/8lQaJFuqw3HqbG1z/d8e/Lo1Zhek00
9NzIA/YiIHX7gxF9UBtfLCAeTHUKQ8tEmGHGB3ajut2hPbupCOhup53aHoeeSBCG
aDb5sgKTbB2mNAl1mC9Rps9pCY+/cWWUw/MxQpf2EiBtVUSpY7orDsbjHNVuIulp
nlls2LKqAsdpG4jqv4+BgLsZ+SGFewQPD1uDT5xHcBKPOJWLtDFHYWJyaWVsZSBT
YWxhdGkgKERFRklOSVRJVkEpIDxyb290QGdhYnJpeC5hdGguY3g+iF4EExECAB4F
AkXHIOACGwMGCwkIBwMCAxUCAwMWAgECHgECF4AACgkQBzdqU1jKTGxjVQCgnpJw
HR6jMyvzoXQ7mRbg3RMZ+XAAnjVysSajazqIfnGUXlu11Wnl6EdvuQQNBEXHIoAQ
EAD9NUrsBiUdg59V/ol/sLNS2SyHgFWAxUV+H+RYp8yWI4Se6eEEXLmCmC4XHSlM
OdYdY5IEOSaPgIp9HnZPieaOSJCbZ61FbVYmljU2RIO3784riTdNj7kd4f8HBTo/
8oWw6+Cr0ADKcNvOG3aM6OAX0iYB0ngOsghjmG4hSJADpeDepeL9AkZBhy2CIP+f
Cbr7VfUNVOCBGP6JBpebO8k8B8/Vl3jG9k9FH4rNynenQ4TGmdQmGwMNtUyrtXrS
9qOTgCfkgk8umvjik7UNUDwIeVHuETvb9uBkv6fsnx8QzfhApmYawZI2hQptYgFS
xCGs6k8bgv9x32E4FgKTK4kF9EchehSF+wOFdb5kzDX3zbpaSDHG6GXbOGbloasX
LA+2KDjVYHX4DnujLESuUYHHx8kzn6eyrRGjPZ5soeYXp3O9giLpCELD3s0WulJk
zRwohZqkqwd2+Zf2AaxAmx5/aCv2UyqdicKTcyI6joHqsaEc8jl4ZkCf09Ll7UOO
N8mtQYE4lDIHD8nFmG9zAI9a94SS2F9iE7OFmSbxUSoG3qcfuxrrUa0S/y6erJOT
iCIrM1kf44ZILwx3IYKlMonCh+r4MNqHbJni2jakc50rLy/GLm0id24Fys6dDLHC
OJbrzZxmaLM9PuwZUSw7fmcxXyZB7kX+99yQuyzOiL+1fwADBw/8CbK1M/vgRxPD
2NDh0YNMz++hfqHKSONb2jaHmyAGoZHprB0Pf5SdlIXCTYjBxnsWi9UtpLBVE24G
EAKnrJTXXcK3b7G/5jQtN0geMhThCtkU45jJTLR2ZipoCqa5iAf8FmmCehnAW9c2
NFaJ5BCdmWc16Jr++yNvyG9HFQBYcNk+i6xfhVtZROvAEMnPy9gjtjbXcvTqdm5E
KusaCK0XQZ1rwwcTTipBmtkbKnGBmd0l59HttOiXrOrSzn8StqEC2W8xEkIxrUHH
y9cRXijL7yfwVP2xXL/p2iA1IaaIvD9HK+ysSBVvZYXRBWb4HMiPpVm5qzGd3dq1
nHC51Jd4r0s0nUqLiW6LUqQc3eGbNaPXT3NuP2lBVaULu8o/SCnaJXIDpvT2EDsQ
njHj4iFptdAczqMfb8Kd85eu+wGA0k6DbKiCnYYr0x09a4IfQCesaLSaWOSd8zCH
mZFSmiYBnWiikSjvKoCfSccO3RXr7e4EWb1RMu6o+p9KfSI6TGwVCoHdp0qDq868
MU9V/OI9HSiEO5KgJIm1CbYc5Xx/5bTn/vlrhTY2MJl7Jyh1mgUbH7ZuvyKLJWI7
0cmgXoiZ0G1WWbQ5yLfs24M1lu7iILukkVMbFcSU+bOguqHM0a7nnJQR9eD0YuzA
yDw5h/7RA6GazbYSnSR/e6jVcovoivSISQQYEQIACQUCRccigAIbDAAKCRAHN2pT
WMpMbCenAJsG+zAZp5MzqGJ+hH8QtzMnKRs7FgCfYxpI1nO0gpVBGhfGnqDqrDPW
hZI=
=Fb07
-END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Mutt mixmaster gpg pgp

[Thomas Roessler]

I fear that code has gone untested and unmaintained for a long time.

On 2007-02-05 17:49:55 +0100, gab bag wrote:
 From: gab bag [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: mutt-users@mutt.org
 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2007 17:49:55 +0100
 Subject: Mutt mixmaster gpg pgp
 X-Spam-Level: 
 
 I'm using mutt with mixmaster and gnupg all fine apart from mixmaster .If i 
 send a mail not forwarded by any mix 
 chai the mail get delivered right with content , pgp signature and everithing 
 .If i send it through a mix chai it 
 gets delivered reporting only the pgp signature and no content,i'm not such a 
 gnupg experct so why is that ? Thank 
 you! If i'd send this mail through a mix chain you wouldn't have read 
 anything and is this actual mail correct ? 
 -- 
 http://tor.gabrix.ath.cx
 
 Key fingerprint = 7AD2 BCB4 B9BF 1303 FE84  8D3A 0737 6A53 58CA 4C6C
 -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
 
 mQGhBEXHIOARBAC/s2H3Nj8ewRy64x6KGQ9Q+QYx7zuQUGGrwdjW6wGRJwjzemnn
 DEelpdmNwyMaw+e6Z0jR03Luw0j9IC7mp+R7LxU1FdvCRR77Bv9QP2vStv9txWN8
 4H7I63H5gzZ7WAec0n2g2KPPlsQoCOMW699BECgFyQRPs5yDVK+MPIbqxwCg2soK
 lN/c04cyDao0ShJzp2ooTyED/RU7b1mdGVCS0B/4X/w9qGP65QKt4429dhBn0ABH
 6s9ONLdRowGAeZliDJosX1d2+hg10dgDalgLCCeJPwROwlEvmDPhEgs9EoB7Kg08
 XUCUuT6zsc7reELLJ/y13J1iXZjzLbDaY/8lQaJFuqw3HqbG1z/d8e/Lo1Zhek00
 9NzIA/YiIHX7gxF9UBtfLCAeTHUKQ8tEmGHGB3ajut2hPbupCOhup53aHoeeSBCG
 aDb5sgKTbB2mNAl1mC9Rps9pCY+/cWWUw/MxQpf2EiBtVUSpY7orDsbjHNVuIulp
 nlls2LKqAsdpG4jqv4+BgLsZ+SGFewQPD1uDT5xHcBKPOJWLtDFHYWJyaWVsZSBT
 YWxhdGkgKERFRklOSVRJVkEpIDxyb290QGdhYnJpeC5hdGguY3g+iF4EExECAB4F
 AkXHIOACGwMGCwkIBwMCAxUCAwMWAgECHgECF4AACgkQBzdqU1jKTGxjVQCgnpJw
 HR6jMyvzoXQ7mRbg3RMZ+XAAnjVysSajazqIfnGUXlu11Wnl6EdvuQQNBEXHIoAQ
 EAD9NUrsBiUdg59V/ol/sLNS2SyHgFWAxUV+H+RYp8yWI4Se6eEEXLmCmC4XHSlM
 OdYdY5IEOSaPgIp9HnZPieaOSJCbZ61FbVYmljU2RIO3784riTdNj7kd4f8HBTo/
 8oWw6+Cr0ADKcNvOG3aM6OAX0iYB0ngOsghjmG4hSJADpeDepeL9AkZBhy2CIP+f
 Cbr7VfUNVOCBGP6JBpebO8k8B8/Vl3jG9k9FH4rNynenQ4TGmdQmGwMNtUyrtXrS
 9qOTgCfkgk8umvjik7UNUDwIeVHuETvb9uBkv6fsnx8QzfhApmYawZI2hQptYgFS
 xCGs6k8bgv9x32E4FgKTK4kF9EchehSF+wOFdb5kzDX3zbpaSDHG6GXbOGbloasX
 LA+2KDjVYHX4DnujLESuUYHHx8kzn6eyrRGjPZ5soeYXp3O9giLpCELD3s0WulJk
 zRwohZqkqwd2+Zf2AaxAmx5/aCv2UyqdicKTcyI6joHqsaEc8jl4ZkCf09Ll7UOO
 N8mtQYE4lDIHD8nFmG9zAI9a94SS2F9iE7OFmSbxUSoG3qcfuxrrUa0S/y6erJOT
 iCIrM1kf44ZILwx3IYKlMonCh+r4MNqHbJni2jakc50rLy/GLm0id24Fys6dDLHC
 OJbrzZxmaLM9PuwZUSw7fmcxXyZB7kX+99yQuyzOiL+1fwADBw/8CbK1M/vgRxPD
 2NDh0YNMz++hfqHKSONb2jaHmyAGoZHprB0Pf5SdlIXCTYjBxnsWi9UtpLBVE24G
 EAKnrJTXXcK3b7G/5jQtN0geMhThCtkU45jJTLR2ZipoCqa5iAf8FmmCehnAW9c2
 NFaJ5BCdmWc16Jr++yNvyG9HFQBYcNk+i6xfhVtZROvAEMnPy9gjtjbXcvTqdm5E
 KusaCK0XQZ1rwwcTTipBmtkbKnGBmd0l59HttOiXrOrSzn8StqEC2W8xEkIxrUHH
 y9cRXijL7yfwVP2xXL/p2iA1IaaIvD9HK+ysSBVvZYXRBWb4HMiPpVm5qzGd3dq1
 nHC51Jd4r0s0nUqLiW6LUqQc3eGbNaPXT3NuP2lBVaULu8o/SCnaJXIDpvT2EDsQ
 njHj4iFptdAczqMfb8Kd85eu+wGA0k6DbKiCnYYr0x09a4IfQCesaLSaWOSd8zCH
 mZFSmiYBnWiikSjvKoCfSccO3RXr7e4EWb1RMu6o+p9KfSI6TGwVCoHdp0qDq868
 MU9V/OI9HSiEO5KgJIm1CbYc5Xx/5bTn/vlrhTY2MJl7Jyh1mgUbH7ZuvyKLJWI7
 0cmgXoiZ0G1WWbQ5yLfs24M1lu7iILukkVMbFcSU+bOguqHM0a7nnJQR9eD0YuzA
 yDw5h/7RA6GazbYSnSR/e6jVcovoivSISQQYEQIACQUCRccigAIbDAAKCRAHN2pT
 WMpMbCenAJsG+zAZp5MzqGJ+hH8QtzMnKRs7FgCfYxpI1nO0gpVBGhfGnqDqrDPW
 hZI=
 =Fb07
 -END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-



-- 
Thomas Roessler   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

mutt-1.3.99i: gpg doesn't work

[mjbjr]

I had mutt-1.2.5i working fine with gpg-1.0.6.

Today, i upgraded mutt to:

   [mjbjr@localhost gnupg-1.0.7]$ mutt -v
   Mutt 1.3.99i (2002-05-02)

Now, when I invoke pgp/gpg with 'p', then 'a(s)', then enter some text to
specify a key, all I get is a beep.  If a don't enter some text to specify a
key, I get a mutt notification that seems to indicate it can't find gpg/pgp.
Anything else pgp/gpg in mutt ( in regards to sending a msg) results in a beep.

A check of docs and the list archives doesn't reveal anything significant.
I don't find any config vars that would I would use to point to pgp/gpg
binary.  I did find a few semi-related things that implied that maybe I should
update to the latest gnupg.

I update to the latest, gnupg-1.0.7.

Now, all mutt pgp actions in regards to sending a message result in a beep.

Both, mutt and gnupg compiled and installed without problems.

mutt was configured with:

   ./configure --enable-pop --enable-imap --with-ssl

Other programs that use gpg/pgp continue to work with the new gnupg.

Any ideas on how to solve this?

Thank you.

-- 
- Martin J. Brown, Jr. -   
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -   
   
  Public PGP Key ID: 0xB29EDDCADB184F7B keyserver: http://certserver.pgp.com/

Fw: Re: [LIH] mutt and gpg

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Just FYI ... this is pretty good as far as I can see.

- Forwarded message from USM Bish [EMAIL PROTECTED] -

From: USM Bish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:31:19 +0530
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [LIH] mutt and gpg
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i

On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 10:19:31AM +0530, Sayamindu Dasgupta wrote:
 
 is there any way in mutt to gpg-sign only certain messages?
 for example, when i post to the  LIH or any list,  i  don't 
 want to sign them 'coz they only cause confusions  but when 
 i'm doing other jobs i want the mails to be signed.
 
 --__--__--
---end quoted text---

Couldn't resist the temptation to do some advertising. Use
rotator ! It is capable of attaching LOSTS, any other sig,
No sig, or PGP/GPG sigs, for each mail individually chosen.
Works perfectly with mutt, and pine !! Nothing  else gives
you that wide a choice :-) 

http://geocities.com/usmbish/rotator-0.5.tar.gz

The official method ofcourse is send-hook switch in your
.muttrc. However how many addresses can  you  really block
with send-hooks ? PGP/GPG is NOT needed for  99% of mails.
It is possible to get responses from people saying  Could
not decipher the gibberish at the end of the mail/ att !

HTH

Bish


--
:
[ Linux One Stanza Tip (LOST) ]###

Sub : Untar a bunch of tarballs (with wildcard)  LOST #211

Unlike gzip, tar does not accept wildcards.'tar -xzf *.tar.gz'
will not work. However, this will untar a bunch of tarballs in 
a  particular directory with a  prompt for  very  tarball  met 
before untarring: 'ls *.tar.gz | xargs -p -l tar -xzvf'.

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
:

___
linux-india-help mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-india-help

- End forwarded message -

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Jeffrey Canton]

 I've used a send-hook along with auto-encrypt before, and that works
 fine.  As for getting the info from your keyring, the only way that
 comes to mind is running some kind of script on a regular basis (perhaps
 a cron job) that lists your keyring, extracts the email addresses from
 the key info (perhaps with sed and/or awk), and throws them in a file
 that is sourced by Mutt in order to build the send-hooks.  This sounds
 like a lot of work though... perhaps there is a better way.  

Justin,

I wrote a small script that may be of some help.  i'm sure there are a lot of
people on the list who could have done this much more elegantly, but its the
best I could do!  

The script assumes that you have your mutt aliases and pgp
hooks in a different file so please don't run and pass it a file in which there
are other things of importance (without modifying it first).  It will also sort
your aliases file (also assumed to be a separate file).


Jeff

Oh yeah, it won't work right out of the box so make sure to look through it and change
the emails to something meaningful



 GPG_Hook_Processor.sh
 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Jean-Sebastien Morisset]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:59:08PM -0400, Dan Boger wrote:
 
 gpg --list-keys | perl -n -e '/(.*?)/; print send-hook $1 \set 
pgp_autoencrypt\\n'  ~/.muttrc.autoenc

gpg --list-keys|perl -ne '/^.*(.*).*$/; print send-hook $1 \set 
pgp_autoencrypt\\n if $1;'|sort -u

Removes blank lines and duplicates. :-)

LateR!
js.
- -- 
Jean-Sebastien Morisset, Sr. UNIX Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personal Homepage http://jsmoriss.mvlan.net/
This is Linux Country. On a quiet night you can hear Windows NT reboot!
-  please pgp encrypt all correspondence 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Personal Home Page http://jsmoriss.mvlan.net/

iD8DBQE7sJ2dnGyIOcYaingRAjQYAKDrun4TV+KEuaB1zYpUp6hhRwMtbQCfUMYX
PjshUwUHXi95H/v98FNkd5Y=
=mTN5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Justin R. Miller]

Thus spake Derek D. Martin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

 I have been using  mutt with pgp for some  time now, but I've now  got
 enough people that I want to send encrypted mail to on a regular basis
 that I'd like to have mutt automatically  encrypt mail to everyone for
 whom I  have public keys, and just  leave  it unencrytped for everyone
 else.  I looked through the manual, and though it seems like send-hook
 and/or auto-encrypt might be helpful  for this, there's nothing  clear
 that I could  find in the manual to  explain how to   do this.  Anyone
 have pointers?

I've used a send-hook along with auto-encrypt before, and that works
fine.  As for getting the info from your keyring, the only way that
comes to mind is running some kind of script on a regular basis (perhaps
a cron job) that lists your keyring, extracts the email addresses from
the key info (perhaps with sed and/or awk), and throws them in a file
that is sourced by Mutt in order to build the send-hooks.  This sounds
like a lot of work though... perhaps there is a better way.  

 For those who may be curious why I  want to do  this, my philosophy is
 that the e-mail I send is  private, and even  if there is no sensitive
 data  in the e-mail, it simply  is no one's  business but  mine and my
 intended  recipient's.  Therefore,  I wish to   encrypt ALL e-mail for
 anyone whose  public key I   have, thus preventing  bored operators at
 ISPs between me and my recipient from reading my personal mail.
 
 While I  won't disagree with  you if  I think  this  is paranoid,  you
 should know that  I have interviewed people (more  than one)  who have
 told me  point blank that  they hook sniffers up  to their servers and
 see what they can read,  just for fun, at their  present jobs at ISPs.
 Personally, I find this intollerable.

Valid reasons to me!

-- 
| Justin R. Miller / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 0xC9C40C31
| Of all the things I've lost, I miss my pants the most.
--

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[René Clerc]

* Derek D. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [24-09-2001 23:43]:

|  I think it's a nice feature you describe. I don't have the answer, but
|  if someone has, I'll benefit from it too!
| 
| Since you said so,  I CC:'d the list so  they'll know I'm not the only
| one who's paranoid...  =8^) I mean, so the developers will know others
| find this feature desireable.  I hope you don't mind...

Of course not. I just had the feeling I was slightly drifting OT...
but you're right, the more people in favor of this feature, the better!

|  The reason why I'm mailing you is the following question:
|  
|  Your email body is justified. How do you do this? With vim somehow?
|  Could you explain this to me?

[... some marvelous Xemacs trick ...]

Does anybody know if it's possible with vim? I mostly use mutt over
ssh...

|  You'll want to change your signature to start with sigdashes
|  (dash-dash-space) in stead of just two dashes...
| 
| Yeah... I switched computers, and have no .sig file on this one, so I
| typed it by hand...  :) Mutt does the right thing if you've got a sig
| file.  Sorry.

No hard feelings ;)

-- 
René Clerc  - ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Nice computers don't go down.

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Justin R. Miller]

Thus spake René Clerc ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):

 [... some marvelous Xemacs trick ...]
 
 Does anybody know if it's possible with vim? I mostly use mutt over
 ssh...

Here's one way:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mutt-users/message/20095
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mutt-users/message/21602

-- 
| Justin R. Miller / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 0xC9C40C31
| Of all the things I've lost, I miss my pants the most.
--

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Dan Boger]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 04:55:26PM -0400, Derek D. Martin wrote:
 I have been using  mutt with pgp for some  time now, but I've now  got
 enough people that I want to send encrypted mail to on a regular basis
 that I'd like to have mutt automatically  encrypt mail to everyone for
 whom I  have public keys, and just  leave  it unencrytped for everyone
 else.  I looked through the manual, and though it seems like send-hook
 and/or auto-encrypt might be helpful  for this, there's nothing  clear
 that I could  find in the manual to  explain how to   do this.  Anyone
 have pointers?

something like this.

add to your .muttrc:

source .muttrc.autoenc

and add a cronjob:

gpg --list-keys | perl -n -e '/(.*?)/; print send-hook $1 \set 
pgp_autoencrypt\\n'  ~/.muttrc.autoenc

would that do? :)

great idea, btw, I like it!  

-- 
Dan Boger
Linux MVP
brainbench.com


 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Piet Delport]

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 24 Sep 2001 at 18:07:15 -0400, Justin R. Miller wrote:
 Thus spake Ren=E9 Clerc ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
=20
  [... some marvelous Xemacs trick ...]
 =20
  Does anybody know if it's possible with vim? I mostly use mutt over
  ssh...
=20
 Here's one way:
=20
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mutt-users/message/20095
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mutt-users/message/21602

That explains wrapping, but not right-justification, which i think is
what Ren=E9 wants.

Reading `:h right-justify' in vim pointed me to a utility called `par'.
I've only looked at par's options cursorially, but it seems filtering
text through `par 72j' does the trick, including preserving quoting.

This can be done via !{motion}par 72j, or more conveniently by setting
vim's `equalprg' or `formatprg' options to `par 72j', and then
formatting text with =3D{motion} or gq{motion}, respectively.

--=20
Piet Delport [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Today's subliminal thought is:

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE7r77CzRUP82sZFCcRAmbPAKCgLiGQJfG9EOxtiDzvHub08jmxqwCeJX5Y
Kv08GnS7bZ7WG6y9ySEnXwk=
=4tXS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--RnlQjJ0d97Da+TV1--

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Derek D. Martin]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 06:59:08PM -0400, Dan Boger wrote:
 On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 04:55:26PM -0400, Derek D. Martin wrote:
  I have been using  mutt with pgp for some  time now, but I've now  got
  enough people that I want to send encrypted mail to on a regular basis
  that I'd like to have mutt automatically  encrypt mail to everyone for
  whom I  have public keys, and just  leave  it unencrytped for everyone
  else.


 
 add to your .muttrc:
 
 source .muttrc.autoenc
 
 and add a cronjob:
 
 gpg --list-keys | perl -n -e '/(.*?)/; print send-hook $1 \set 
pgp_autoencrypt\\n'  ~/.muttrc.autoenc
 
 would that do? :)

It looks like it will...  I'll give it a try ASAP.  Thanks!

 great idea, btw, I like it!  

Thanks again... I thought so too.  =8^)

Ok, another question for the crypto fans out there.  I've been getting
complaints from people I know that use other mailers that they simply
can't get my signature to validate when I send them signed mail.
Apparently, mutt is the only mailer on the planet that handles PGP
signatures the way it does, from what people are telling me.  

Also, while I have made almost no effort to verify this (and of course
that means I didn't), I've been told that the way mutt handles
signatures is in violation of the OpenPGP standard, and that the GnuPG
people are pretty unhappy about it.

What's the deal?


-- 
---
Derek Martin  |   Unix/Linux geek
[EMAIL PROTECTED]|   GnuPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D
Retrieve my public key at http://pgp.mit.edu

Re: Mutt and GPG

[David Rock]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2001 at 11:50:52PM +0200, René Clerc wrote:
 |  The reason why I'm mailing you is the following question:
 |  
 |  Your email body is justified. How do you do this? With vim somehow?
 |  Could you explain this to me?
 
 Does anybody know if it's possible with vim? I mostly use mutt over
 ssh...

I found this in the vim docs:
*right-justify*
There is no command in Vim to right justify text.  You can do it with
an external command, like par (e.g.: !}par to format until the end of the
paragraph) or set 'formatprg' to par.


This would suggest that full justification is also not possible within
vim natively. I don't have par installed, so I can't test to see if it
would do it.

-- 
David Rock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

David Rock mutt [24/09/01 22:31 -0500]:
 This would suggest that full justification is also not possible within
 vim natively. I don't have par installed, so I can't test to see if it
 would do it.


set editor=vim +':set tw=77' +':set wrap' +\`awk '/^$/ {print i+2; exit} {i++}' %s\` 
%s

--suresh

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and gpg encryption-problem

[R. Leponce]

| Hi all..
| 
| ich have a small problem (I think) with mutt and gpg.
| I'v got mutt-1.3.19 with gnupg-1.0.6 and all went fine, but when I want to
| encrypt a mail, I got this:
| 
| usage: gpg [options] --encrypt [filename]
| 
| I seems something wrong, but i do not find this error.
| 
| In my .muttrc I have this vor gpg- encryptions:
| 
| set pgp_encrypt_only_command=gpg -v --batch --output - --encrypt --textmode
| --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
| 
| set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch --textmode
| --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- 
| -r %r -- %f.

try this:
set pgp_encrypt_only_command=pgpewrap gpg -v --batch --output - --encrypt
--textmode --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch
--output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r --
%f

It works fine for me ...

R.
-- 
vb $factor | ps auxw | grep bobot
gally gally 1846  0.0  7.3  4140 2300 ? SAug03   2:16 bobot++
vb $factor | kill -9 1846
-*- SignOff gally (EOF From client)

 - #linuxfr

 PGP signature

Mutt and gpg encryption-problem

[Jan-Hendrik Palic]

Hi all..

ich have a small problem (I think) with mutt and gpg.
I'v got mutt-1.3.19 with gnupg-1.0.6 and all went fine, but when I want to
encrypt a mail, I got this:

usage: gpg [options] --encrypt [filename]

I seems something wrong, but i do not find this error.

In my .muttrc I have this vor gpg- encryptions:

set pgp_encrypt_only_command=gpg -v --batch --output - --encrypt --textmode
--armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch --textmode
--output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust --
-r %r -- %f.

What's going wrong?

Thnx for your help?

Cheers
Jan

-- 
One time, you all will be emulated by linux!


Jan- Hendrik Palic
Url:http://www.billgotchy.de;
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s: a-- C++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E W++ N+ o+ K- w--- 
O- M- V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5- X+++ R-- tv- b++ DI-- D+++ 
G+++ e+++ h+ r++ z+ 
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--

 PGP signature

Mutt and gpg encryption-problem

[Jan-Hendrik Palic]

Hi all..

ich have a small problem (I think) with mutt and gpg.
I'v got mutt-1.3.19 with gnupg-1.0.6 and all went fine, but when I want to
encrypt a mail, I got this:

usage: gpg [options] --encrypt [filename]

I seems something wrong, but i do not find this error.

In my .muttrc I have this vor gpg- encryptions:

set pgp_encrypt_only_command=gpg -v --batch --output - --encrypt --textmode
--armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch --textmode
--output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- 
-r %r -- %f.

What's going wrong?

Thnx for your help?

Cheers   
Jan

-- 
One time, you all will be emulated by linux!


Jan- Hendrik Palic
Url:http://www.billgotchy.de;
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-
Version: 3.12
GCS d- s: a-- C++ UL++ P+++ L+++ E W++ N+ o+ K- w--- 
O- M- V- PS++ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5- X+++ R-- tv- b++ DI-- D+++ 
G+++ e+++ h+ r++ z+ 
--END GEEK CODE BLOCK--

 PGP signature

Re: Mutt and gpg encryption-problem

[Frank Derichsweiler]

On Mon, Aug 13, 2001 at 11:43:53PM +0200, Jan-Hendrik Palic wrote:
 
 In my .muttrc I have this vor gpg- encryptions:
 
 set pgp_encrypt_only_command=gpg -v --batch --output - --encrypt --textmode
 --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f
 
 set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v --batch --textmode
 --output - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust --
 -r %r -- %f.
 
I am using the contributed gpg.rc file and there I have
set pgp_encrypt_only_command=pgpewrap gpg -v --batch -o - --encrypt 
--textmode --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

set pgp_encrypt_sign_command=pgpewrap gpg --passphrase-fd 0 -v
--batch -o - --encrypt --sign %?a?-u %a? --armor --always-trust -- -r %r -- %f

and pgpewrap is as follows:

#!/bin/sh --

cmd=$1
pfx=

die() {
echo Command line usage: $0 [flags] -- prefix [recipients]
 2
exit 1
}

while test $# -gt 0  shift  test -n $1 ; do
if test $1 = -- ; then
shift || die
pfx=$1
shift || die
fi
cmd=$cmd $pfx $1
done

exec $cmd


HTH
Frank

Mutt and GPG

[Scott Davis]

Hi!

Does anyone have the .muttrc commands off hand for the operation of GNUPG
under Mutt?

Thanks in advance!

---
S c o t t   A.   D a v i s ! Si vis pacem para bellum
sdavis at Austin-Texas.net ! http://www.austin-texas.net/~sdavis
Packet Wrangler For Hire...! Unemployed victim of bad dot com management

Re: Mutt and GPG

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Scott Davis proclaimed on mutt-users that: 

 Does anyone have the .muttrc commands off hand for the operation of GNUPG
 under Mutt?
 
 /usr/doc/mutt-1.2.5i/samples/gpg.rc

-s (or wherever your mutt docs are located)

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian + Wallopus Malletus Indigenensis
mallet @ cluestick.org + Lumber Cartel of India, tinlcI
EMail Sturmbannfuhrer, Lower Middle Class Unix Sysadmin

Mutt and GPG questions

[Jeremy M. Dolan]

Hello mutt-users...

I recently have set up GPG, and have mutt using it to sign mail... a
few questions:

I have pgp_autosign and pgp_sign_as set, but when I go to send a
message, mutt choses MD5 as the MIC algorithm. If i manually do a sign
as, then select my key, it detects it as SHA1. Is this normal
behaviour, to not have it check what type of key my pgp_sign_as is? I
think a GPG Elgamal+DSA key sent with MD5 is still valid, just
slightly less secure. (Yes, i know there is a set to forge the MIC
algorithm, just making sure this isn't a bug before I turn that on...
if it isn't, the manual.txt should explain you probably want to use
that set too, when you use pgp_sign_as).

Next, i've noticed that mutt trys to use mailcap to view
application/pgp-signature... then it bells and prints No matching
mailcap entry found.  Viewing as text... should it default to handling
it itself, instead of searching mailcap?

Last, I'm sure everyone is quite aware of how stupidly outlook/OE
handle gpg signed mails from mutt... im just curious where it gets the
attachment names from... I sent a message from mutt to my outlook
machine... in mutt's send screen... the attachment names are in the
form:

- I 1 /tmp/mutt-foozle-31258-0 [text/plain, 7bit, us-ascii, 1.4K] 

mutt-hostname-junk... when outlook recieves it, the text and signature
are in two files named:

ATT00166.txt
ATT00169.dat

Are these in the mime mail somewhere, or does outlook just make them
up?

Also, does it's refusal to even display the text/plain attachment have
anything to do with its type being 'quoted'?

Thanks in advance, to anyone who can clear up some of these issues I
have! (Please Cc: me on responses, not on this list anymore)

/jmd

-- 
Jeremy M. Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OpenPGP key = http://turbogeek.org/openpgp-key
OpenPGP fingerprint = 494C 7A6E 19FB 026A 1F52  E0D5 5C5D 6228 DC43 3DEE

 PGP signature

Mutt and GPG

[Graham Lillico]

Hi i have just switched over to mutt from pine and I have started using GPG
with mutt as well,  I think I have everything working correctly apart from
one lillte thing.

When someone send me a email using pine signed with gpg (using pgp4pine)
when I open the email I can read what is contains but at the bottom of the
screen I get the following message "Invoking PGP...", however if I open an
email sent from mutt using gpg to sign it then I get the above message and
then shortly followed by "PGP signature successfully verified."  why don't I
get this from messages sent and signed using pine?  Does this mean it can't
verify the GPG signature?

Regards

Graham Lillico

P.S. I have already inserted the stuff into .promailrc as suggested in the
FAQ.





___
Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp

Re: Mutt and GPG

[clemensF]

 Graham Lillico (Tue 16.0500-08:46):

 [deleted]
 email sent from mutt using gpg to sign it then I get the above message and
 then shortly followed by "PGP signature successfully verified."  why don't I
 get this from messages sent and signed using pine?  Does this mean it can't
 verify the GPG signature?

mutt uses MIME to package message and signature, where both are separate
blocks in the same email.  pine just pipes the message through gpg to have
it signed and you get the email in one chunk.  in this latter case i use a
little script and handfeed it the message by way of a pipe.  here's the
meat:

#!/bin/es
echo $PGPPASS |[1=5] gpg --passphrase-fd 5 $*

invoked by '|lgpg'.  it works when the mess is just signed and also when it
is both encrypted to me and signed by the author.  es() is some smart
little shell.  if my brains's mechanics don't fail me, the sh() translation
should read:

#!/bin/sh
echo $PGPPASS 5 | gpg --passphrase-fd 5 $*

i risk putting my passphrase into $PGPPASS of the environment only because
i got my pitbull 'hate' trained to bite me every 15 minutes to remind me.
if you have a turtle or a rabbit, the training will need time, but with
your passphrase in memory, who cares?


-- 
clemens  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
do  D4685B884894C483
gpg recv-key 0x9
echo `gpg list-key 0x9 | cat -tv` | \
gpg encrypt `gpg list-key 0x9 | 822address` | \
mail -s your-key `gpg list-key 0x9 | 822address`
wait
[encrypted] return mail.
no return mail within a week, you in trouble.
no return mail after a month, i in trouble.
please check
done

Re: mutt and GPG - adding new keys (slightly OT)

[J Horacio MG]

On Wed, Oct 06, 1999 at 10:17:42AM +0530, Abhay Ghaisas said:
 
 Is there any way I can directly add a key that has been sent by
 somebody to me by email into the key-ring directly from mutt?

You must have the following settings:

set pgp_gpg=/usr/bin/gpg#where your GnuPG binary is located

set pgp_default_version=gpg #make GnuPG your default

set pgp_key_version=default #version for extracting keys and adding
#new keys

then the following key binding (all in one line)

macro  pager   \Ck ":set pipe_decode pgp_key_version=pgp2\n\e\ek:set
pgp_key_version=pgp5\n\e\ek:set pgp_key_version=gpg\n\e\ek:set
pgp_key_version=default nopipe_decode\n"\

(this is for the pager, I believe it works in the index menu without the
need of this).

And press ctrlK for key extraction.

 Also, is there any way I can get keys from key-servers from
 behind a fire-wall?

Don't know, but you can always mail a keyserver for key requests, vg:

 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: get ID

where ID may be substituted by a key id (prefixed with 0x) or a user
ID part (email address...).
(the keyserver address in the example is a Spanish one, you should look
for one near to you)


-- 
Horacio LC_mutt=es_ES
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://carlotha.ciberia.es/mutt/
~ Spain ~ Spanje ~ Spanien

Re: mutt and GPG - adding new keys (slightly OT)

[Walter Hofmann]

On Wed, 06 Oct 1999, Abhay Ghaisas wrote:

 Also, is there any way I can get keys from key-servers from
 behind a fire-wall?

GPG doesn't support getting keys via a http proxy, but I wrote a patch
for it; it is attached. 

Apply the patch tp gpg-1.0.0 and set http_proxy, eg.

export http_proxy=http://proxy:80/

gpg will then forward requests via that proxy.


I have two wishes: If you (or anyone else) tries this patch, could you
let me know if it worked for you? (I only tried it on my own computer.)
Does anyone know an email address where I can submit this patch so that
the gpg people take a look at it?

Walter


diff -ur gnupg-1.0.0/util/http.c gnupg-1.0.0-proxy/util/http.c
--- gnupg-1.0.0/util/http.c Sun May 23 13:30:06 1999
+++ gnupg-1.0.0-proxy/util/http.c   Thu Sep  9 19:20:48 1999
@@ -128,7 +128,6 @@
return G10ERR_GENERAL;
 iobuf_close( hd-fp_write );
 hd-fp_write = NULL;
-shutdown( hd-sock, 1 );
 hd-in_data = 0;
 
 hd-fp_read = iobuf_fdopen( hd-sock , "r" );
@@ -139,6 +138,8 @@
 if( !rc  ret_status )
*ret_status = hd-status_code;
 
+shutdown( hd-sock, 1 );
+
 return rc;
 }
 
@@ -427,22 +428,55 @@
 byte *request, *p;
 ushort port;
 int rc;
+const char *proxy_url;
+PARSED_URI proxy_uri;
+int use_proxy = 0;
+const byte *proxy_server;
+ushort proxy_port;
 
 server = *hd-uri-host? hd-uri-host : "localhost";
 port   = hd-uri-port?  hd-uri-port : 80;
 
-hd-sock = connect_server( server, port );
+proxy_url = getenv( "http_proxy" );
+if (proxy_url) {
+rc = parse_uri( proxy_uri, proxy_url );
+if (rc) {
+log_error("cannot parse $http_proxy\n");
+release_parsed_uri( proxy_uri );
+}
+else {
+use_proxy = 1;
+proxy_server = *proxy_uri-host? proxy_uri-host : "localhost";
+proxy_port   = proxy_uri-port?  proxy_uri-port : 80;
+log_info("requesting key via proxy %s:%d\n", proxy_server, proxy_port);
+}
+}  
+   
+if (use_proxy)
+hd-sock = connect_server( proxy_server, proxy_port );
+else
+hd-sock = connect_server( server, port );
+
 if( hd-sock == -1 )
return G10ERR_NETWORK;
 
 p = build_rel_path( hd-uri );
-request = m_alloc( strlen(p) + 20 );
-sprintf( request, "%s %s%s HTTP/1.0\r\n",
- hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_GET ? "GET" :
- hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_HEAD? "HEAD":
- hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_POST? "POST": "OOPS",
- *p == '/'? "":"/", p );
+request = m_alloc( strlen(p) + strlen(server) + 40 );
+if (use_proxy)
+sprintf( request, "%s http://%s:%d%s%s HTTP/1.0\r\n\r",
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_GET ? "GET" :
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_HEAD? "HEAD":
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_POST? "POST": "OOPS",
+server, port, *p == '/'? "":"/", p );
+else
+sprintf( request, "%s %s%s HTTP/1.0\r\n\r",
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_GET ? "GET" :
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_HEAD? "HEAD":
+  hd-req_type == HTTP_REQ_POST? "POST": "OOPS",
+*p == '/'? "":"/", p );
 m_free(p);
+if (use_proxy)
+release_parsed_uri( proxy_uri );
 
 rc = write_server( hd-sock, request, strlen(request) );
 m_free( request );

 PGP signature

Re: mutt and gpg ?

[brian moore]

On Mon, Feb 08, 1999 at 11:09:06AM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
 On Fri, Feb 05, 1999 at 08:43:47AM +0100, Georg Josef Uphoff wrote:
  Well, this might be a simple question, but how do I use
  mutt with GnuPG ?
 
 I'd recommend against this currently: gpg gives validity information
 which is computed according to an - erm - interesting model.  Werner
 is apparently changing this currently.  Before this change has been
 implemented, you should better use one of the "classical" PGP
 versions.

But that's only an issue if you actually use the 'web of trust' stuff
for validity.  Many if not most PGP users don't actually use it and just
trust that 0xDEADBEEF is their pal.

-- 
Brian Moore   | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
  Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker |  a cockroach, except that the cockroach
  Usenet Vandal   |  is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
  Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster

mutt and gpg ?

[Georg Josef Uphoff]

Well, this might be a simple question, but how do I use
mutt with GnuPG ?

Thanks.
-- 
-
Georg Josef Uphoff
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.uphoff-ib.com/guphoff

Re: mutt and gpg ?

[brian moore]

On Fri, Feb 05, 1999 at 08:43:47AM +0100, Georg Josef Uphoff wrote:
 Well, this might be a simple question, but how do I use
 mutt with GnuPG ?

It should be mostly automatic.

When you get to the 'send menu', type a 'p' and it will let you sign
and/or encrypt your mail.

(This is, of course, assuming that your copy of Mutt supports gpg.)

-- 
Brian Moore   | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
  Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker |  a cockroach, except that the cockroach
  Usenet Vandal   |  is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
  Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster

Re: mutt and gpg ?

[Christian Kurz]

Georg Josef Uphoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Well, this might be a simple question, but how do I use
 mutt with GnuPG ?

You need to set the configuration variables so, and then you can use
gnugp instead of pgp:

set pgp_v2=/usr/bin/pgp # pgp 2.* binary
set pgp_v2_pubring=~/.pgp/pubring.pgp   # Public PGP-Keyring (PGP 2.*)
set pgp_v2_secring=~/.pgp/secring.pgp   # Secret PGP-Keyring (PGP 2.*)
set pgp_default_version=gpg  # pgp2, pgp5, gpg (default for the following)
set pgp_receive_version=gpg  # pgp-version for decrypting and verifying 
sigs
set pgp_send_version=gpg # pgp-version for composing messages
set pgp_key_version=gpg  # pgp-version for extracting and sending keys

The other variables for pgp can be set as you want.

Ciao
 Christian
-- 
/* http://www.rhein-neckar.de/~jupiter/Christian Kurz */