On 02/25/2011 09:57 AM, Bernhard Heinzle wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> i'm trying to set up header interpretation rules for MS exchange. But
> i've got the problem that i can define regular expressions for the
> value of the header but not for the name of the header itself.
> 
> In my test cases i always had
> X-Djigzo-Info-Signer-Trusted-0-1: True
> or
> X-Djigzo-Info-Signer-Trusted-0-0: True
> (same thing with the "Verified" header).
> 
> Are there any other numbering combinations (1-0, 0-2, ...) that can
> occur for the *-Signer* header?
> 
> Regarding the headers for the encryption:
> Is the existence a header with the name
> X-Djigzo-Info-Encryption-Algorithm-0: and any value sufficient to
> notify the user that the message was encrypted? And is it possible
> that the name of the header contains any other numbers than 0?

This is more or less explained in Appendix A of the S/MIME support guide
but it boils down to this:

An S/MIME message can be encrypted and signed with multiple levels in
random order. For example a message can be signed, then encrypted and
then signed again. The numbering scheme shows for which level the
particular header is. So for example if a message is signed and then
encrypted (the most standard version) the
X-Djigzo-Info-Encryption-Algorithm-0 tells you with which encryption
algorithm the message was encrypted.
Because the message is 'peeled' from outer layer to inner layer, when a
message is signed and then encrypted, the outer layer is encrypted,
hence the -0 level.

To answer your question, if the header
X-Djigzo-Info-Encryption-Algorithm-0 is present, it means that the outer
layer was encrypted so that should be sufficient if that's the only
information you need.

Kind regards,

Martijn


-- 
Djigzo open source email encryption

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.djigzo.com/lists/listinfo/users

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to