Re: bug#19148: ls --inode --sort=inode

[Eric Blake]

On 11/21/2014 10:22 PM, Bob Proulx wrote:

>>>> Could it be because I am GPG-signing my emails, and mailman is
>>>> eating mails with gpg signatures?
> 
> Initially I had mentally thought, no, no way.  Because gpg signed
> emails have the regular part in the text/plain part of the attachment.

There's two type of gpg signatures.  One is inline:

>> Content-Type:
>> text/plain; charset=utf-8
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding:
>> 7bit
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA256
>> 
>> ...body
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1
>> Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg


the other is MIME-encoded:

>> Content-Type:
>> multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; 
>> boundary="EcqJ4x5hreffviUbWOHVOBOXboQa5dWHq"
>> 
>> This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
>> --EcqJ4x5hreffviUbWOHVOBOXboQa5dWHq
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>> ...body
>> --EcqJ4x5hreffviUbWOHVOBOXboQa5dWHq
>> Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
>> Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1

The inline messages are a single text/plain segment and get through just
fine, but look odd in mail clients that aren't set up to handle signed
messages (the signature block is displayed inline).  The MIME-encoded
messages are a multi-segment message; they look much nicer in clients
that are prepared to deal with it, and even older clients that don't
know how to deal with it tend to display just the text/pain subsection
just fine.

I suspect that what happened was you turned on some filtering for
messages with more than one MIME part, which nuked MIME-encoded GPG
signatures for being multipart/signed instead of text/plain.

> (I routinely sign all of my email to the Debian lists because I have
> been the target of forges there.)  I am still thinking that gpg signed
> messages should be fine.  But I think the only recent changes were
> mine so it must have been me.

Most likely, you have been using inline signatures rather than
MIME-encoding.

> 
> Sorry again for the problem.

Thanks, and hope that fixes it.  Maybe we can still tune the filters to
reject images without also rejecting signed mails.  Also, I'm interested
in knowing which settings it was that you tweaked.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature