Re: Verification Failure
Are the messages stored with compression option enabled ? If so this is why the sigs are different. __.https://eXtremeSHOK.com .__ On 03/08/2017 11:20 AM, Stephan Schöffel wrote: > > Hello Janos, > > is there a fix to this? > > Stephan > > > Am 20.02.2017 um 17:43 schrieb Janos SUTO: >> Hello Stephan, >> >> you exported the message, and checked the current sha256 values. >> >> You also queried the stored sha256 sums from the metadata table. >> >> Comparing these values we can assume that either the metadata entries >> have changed or the stored message. >> >> Janos >> >> *From:* "Stephan Schöffel" >> *Sent:* Mon Feb 20 15:52:01 GMT+01:00 2017 >> *To:* Piler User >> *Subject:* Re: Verification Failure >> >> Hello Janos, >> >> still don't know exactly what to compare. >> >> Form pilertest I get: >> >> root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# pilertest message.txt | grep 'body digest' >> body digest: >> ae927d2d6228f75a9bf8be6d96b6264287f615bf0273a170aaa50c2f30b721da >> >> From sha256sum I get: >> >> root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# sha256sum message.txt >> acaf159d68e628bbd5397dcc163d700a76e306168680b8beb1bc09761cb60c44 message.txt >> >> From the metadata table I get: >> >> MariaDB [piler]> select digest, bodydigest from metadata where piler_id >> = '4000586a3e193199bb2400c9daf66a7e' ; >> + >> >> + >> >> + >> | digest | >> bodydigest | >> + >> >> + >> >> + >> | 3758f9e4c13b590810786c0ced2f4bbb6901fee894120da436b09c25e3e21522 | >> bbfef40739b9e1447479ef066f1d0d98bda82eba8fcdff9328df266386072ab6 | >> + >> >> + >> >> + >> 1 row in set (0.00 sec) >> >> >> Cheers >> Stephan >> >> Am 09.02.2017 um 20:01 schrieb Janos SUTO: >> >> the sha256 values you can see in pilertest output (also run >> sha256 ) with the stored results. Janos On 2017-02-02 >> 11:08, Stephan Schöffel wrote: >> >> Which values should I compare? Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb >> Janos SUTO: >> >> Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some >> troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem >> is way too much. So please do the following: Get a >> problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run >> pilertest against it, and get the values from the >> metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos >> - FROM: "Stephan Schöffel" SENT: >> Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 TO: Piler User >> SUBJECT: Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing >> of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without >> an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb >> Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel >> wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I >> get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. >> Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's >> going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification >> failed' message means that the computed checksums (two >> sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at >> archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug >> (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the >> message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. >> Janos >> >> >>
Re: Verification Failure
Hello Janos, is there a fix to this? Stephan Am 20.02.2017 um 17:43 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello Stephan, you exported the message, and checked the current sha256 values. You also queried the stored sha256 sums from the metadata table. Comparing these values we can assume that either the metadata entries have changed or the stored message. Janos *From:* "Stephan Schöffel" *Sent:* Mon Feb 20 15:52:01 GMT+01:00 2017 *To:* Piler User *Subject:* Re: Verification Failure Hello Janos, still don't know exactly what to compare. Form pilertest I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# pilertest message.txt | grep 'body digest' body digest: ae927d2d6228f75a9bf8be6d96b6264287f615bf0273a170aaa50c2f30b721da From sha256sum I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# sha256sum message.txt acaf159d68e628bbd5397dcc163d700a76e306168680b8beb1bc09761cb60c44 message.txt From the metadata table I get: MariaDB [piler]> select digest, bodydigest from metadata where piler_id = '4000586a3e193199bb2400c9daf66a7e' ; + + + | digest | bodydigest | + + + | 3758f9e4c13b590810786c0ced2f4bbb6901fee894120da436b09c25e3e21522 | bbfef40739b9e1447479ef066f1d0d98bda82eba8fcdff9328df266386072ab6 | + + + 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Cheers Stephan Am 09.02.2017 um 20:01 schrieb Janos SUTO: the sha256 values you can see in pilertest output (also run sha256 ) with the stored results. Janos On 2017-02-02 11:08, Stephan Schöffel wrote: Which values should I compare? Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem is way too much. So please do the following: Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos - FROM: "Stephan Schöffel" SENT: Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 TO: Piler User SUBJECT: Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos
Re: Verification Failure
Hello Stephan, you exported the message, and checked the current sha256 values. You also queried the stored sha256 sums from the metadata table. Comparing these values we can assume that either the metadata entries have changed or the stored message. Janos Original Message From: "Stephan Schöffel" Sent: Mon Feb 20 15:52:01 GMT+01:00 2017 To: Piler User Subject: Re: Verification Failure Hello Janos, still don't know exactly what to compare. Form pilertest I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# pilertest message.txt | grep 'body digest' body digest: ae927d2d6228f75a9bf8be6d96b6264287f615bf0273a170aaa50c2f30b721da From sha256sum I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# sha256sum message.txt acaf159d68e628bbd5397dcc163d700a76e306168680b8beb1bc09761cb60c44 message.txt From the metadata table I get: MariaDB [piler]> select digest, bodydigest from metadata where piler_id = '4000586a3e193199bb2400c9daf66a7e' ; +--+--+ | digest | bodydigest | +--+--+ | 3758f9e4c13b590810786c0ced2f4bbb6901fee894120da436b09c25e3e21522 | bbfef40739b9e1447479ef066f1d0d98bda82eba8fcdff9328df266386072ab6 | +--+--+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Cheers Stephan Am 09.02.2017 um 20:01 schrieb Janos SUTO: > the sha256 values you can see in pilertest output (also run sha256 > ) > with the stored results. > > Janos > > On 2017-02-02 11:08, Stephan Schöffel wrote: >> Which values should I compare? >> >> Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb Janos SUTO: >> >>> Hello Stephan, >>> >>> no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ >>> verification problem is way too much. >>> >>> So please do the following: >>> >>> Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run >>> pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, >>> and compare the results. >>> >>> Janos >>> >>> Janos >>> >>> - >>> FROM: "Stephan Schöffel" >>> SENT: Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 >>> TO: Piler User >>> >>> SUBJECT: Re: Verification Failure >>> >>> Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug >>> occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 >>> schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel >>> wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% >>> "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log >>> file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the >>> 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two >>> sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving >>> time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was >>> an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually >>> changed. I can't tell which. Janos
Re: Verification Failure
Hello Janos, still don't know exactly what to compare. Form pilertest I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# pilertest message.txt | grep 'body digest' body digest: ae927d2d6228f75a9bf8be6d96b6264287f615bf0273a170aaa50c2f30b721da From sha256sum I get: root@mailarchiv:/tmp/mailarchive# sha256sum message.txt acaf159d68e628bbd5397dcc163d700a76e306168680b8beb1bc09761cb60c44 message.txt From the metadata table I get: MariaDB [piler]> select digest, bodydigest from metadata where piler_id = '4000586a3e193199bb2400c9daf66a7e' ; +--+--+ | digest | bodydigest | +--+--+ | 3758f9e4c13b590810786c0ced2f4bbb6901fee894120da436b09c25e3e21522 | bbfef40739b9e1447479ef066f1d0d98bda82eba8fcdff9328df266386072ab6 | +--+--+ 1 row in set (0.00 sec) Cheers Stephan Am 09.02.2017 um 20:01 schrieb Janos SUTO: the sha256 values you can see in pilertest output (also run sha256 ) with the stored results. Janos On 2017-02-02 11:08, Stephan Schöffel wrote: Which values should I compare? Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem is way too much. So please do the following: Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos - FROM: "Stephan Schöffel" SENT: Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 TO: Piler User SUBJECT: Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos
Re: Verification Failure
the sha256 values you can see in pilertest output (also run sha256 ) with the stored results. Janos On 2017-02-02 11:08, Stephan Schöffel wrote: Which values should I compare? Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem is way too much. So please do the following: Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos - FROM: "Stephan Schöffel" SENT: Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 TO: Piler User SUBJECT: Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos -- [1] STEPHAN SCHÖFFEL BITTE BEACHTEN SIE UNSERE NEUE ADRESSE: AKTIVOPTIK SERVICE AG John-F.-Kennedy-Straße 26 D-55543 Bad Kreuznach Tel.: +49 671.796467 150 Mobil: +49 151.28448 602 Fax: +49 671.796467 101 E-Mail: s.schoef...@aktivoptik.de Web: www.aktivoptik.de [1] Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bad Kreuznach HRB 20838 • Amtsgericht Bad Kreuznach Vorstand: Rolf Schneider (Vorsitzender), Ruth Weißmann, Jan Schneider Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Hans-Walter Liese USt-IdNr.: DE 269 834 610 Bankverbindung: Sparkasse Rhein-Nahe IBAN: DE13 5605 0180 0010 0621 80 BIC: MALADE51KRE [2] www.aktivoptik.de [1] [3] Links: -- [1] http://www.aktivoptik.de [2] http://media.opti.de/onlinekatalog/2017/Ausstellerdetails/aktivoptik_Service_AG/?elb=208.1100.2593.1. [3] https://www.facebook.com/aktivoptik.de
Re: Verification Failure
Which values should I compare? Am 01.02.2017 um 10:27 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem is way too much. So please do the following: Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos *From:* "Stephan Schöffel" *Sent:* Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 *To:* Piler User *Subject:* Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos -- aktivoptik <http://www.aktivoptik.de> *Stephan Schöffel* *Bitte beachten Sie unsere neue Adresse:* *aktivoptik Service AG* John-F.-Kennedy-Straße 26 D-55543 Bad Kreuznach Tel.: +49 671.796467 150 Mobil: +49 151.28448 602 Fax: +49 671.796467 101 E-Mail: s.schoef...@aktivoptik.de <mailto:s.schoef...@aktivoptik.de> Web: www.aktivoptik.de <http://www.aktivoptik.de> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Bad Kreuznach HRB 20838 • Amtsgericht Bad Kreuznach Vorstand: Rolf Schneider (Vorsitzender), Ruth Weißmann, Jan Schneider Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Hans-Walter Liese USt-IdNr.: DE 269 834 610 Bankverbindung: Sparkasse Rhein-Nahe IBAN: DE13 5605 0180 0010 0621 80 BIC: MALADE51KRE www.opti.de <http://media.opti.de/onlinekatalog/2017/Ausstellerdetails/aktivoptik_Service_AG/?elb=208.1100.2593.1.> www.aktivoptik.de <http://www.aktivoptik.de> www.facebook.com/aktivoptik.de <https://www.facebook.com/aktivoptik.de>
Re: Verification Failure
Hello Stephan, no, it shouldn't. I need some troubleshooting to figure it out. 3℅ verification problem is way too much. So please do the following: Get a problematic message with pilerget, save to a file, run pilertest against it, and get the values from the metadata table, and compare the results. Janos Janos Original Message From: "Stephan Schöffel" Sent: Wed Feb 01 09:16:22 GMT+01:00 2017 To: Piler User Subject: Re: Verification Failure Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: > Hello, > > On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: >> >> upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% >> "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log >> file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. > > the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums > (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at > archiving time. > > This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade > in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't > tell which. > > Janos >
Re: Verification Failure
Janos, actually nothing of the both has occured. Can the parser bug occur without an update? Cheers Stephan Am 31.01.2017 um 19:26 schrieb Janos SUTO: Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos
Re: Verification Failure
Hello, On 2017-01-30 12:10, Stephan Schöffel wrote: upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. the 'verification failed' message means that the computed checksums (two sha256 hash values) are not the same that were stored at archiving time. This might be the result of a parser bug (assuming there was an upgrade in the meantime), or the message itself is actually changed. I can't tell which. Janos
Verification Failure
Hi there, upon trying to export emails from the archive I get about 3% "verification FAILED" messages. Unfortunately, I cannot find any log file to check what's going on. Maybe you can give me a hint. Cheers Stephan
