Re: [Evolution] Re: Encryption Interoperability (was: should we support pgp interfaces?)

It looks like fejj and notzed have made good progress with the
encryption in evolution. I'm a little gun-shy of the cvs HEAD stuff, or
I'd be building it now. I'll wait for the release, unless you guys feel
really strongly that it's pretty stable. I suffer from the fact that
evolution is so darn handy, I depend on it now, and I can't spend a day
or two (or a week or two) not getting mail if the HEAD revision has some

I congratulate the evolution team on their efforts to support encryption
in evolution. I've never had any real problem sending encrypted matter
to myself or others with evolution. But I have had big probs sending
encrypted matter to non-evolution users. It's not been evolution's
problem in the cases I've seen, but as far as I can tell, Microsoft
either is not able to provide direct PGP support, doesn't want to, or
has such brain-dead hooks for 3rd party software, that no one can
provide good support (based on the success of the PGP i/f with any other
than PGP output). I don't know about any of the others.

Unfortunately, even if evolution is perfect at encryption, until the
majority of other packages in use can handle evolution encrypted data,
and vice-versa, interoperability is just a far off dream. And encryption
for the masses-- forget it.

Outlook seems to be be the most used mail interface in the world. I
guess if the GPG guys really want to make GPG/pgp a hit, they need to
come up with an Outlook interface that is not only as good as what PGP
did, but better, and interoperates with all the other (non-braindead at
least) mailers. I guess this is nigh unto impossible, as it is evident
from using it, that the PGP outlook interface seems to be pretty well
thought out, and has a lot of man-hours behind it. Who knows, maybe if
they weren't on the verge of going out of business, they may have had
the resources to adapt to evolution...


On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 05:27, Not Zed wrote:

multipart/signed has been fixed in 1.1.x version.  It treats the content
entirely as opaque data as per rfc.

The 'openpgp' inline-pgp stuff wont, and probably never will, be
reliable or supported.

2. Evolution PGP signatures louse up outlook. It's most likely OK to


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]