Am Donnerstag, den 24.11.2011, 11:06 +0100 schrieb Milan Crha:
On Wed, 2011-11-23 at 15:23 +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:the attached message is signed but the signature is marked as invalid. I found the following fields. Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="sha1"; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; boundary="=-lYAU0MbfCPO/lYiSvhhG" Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Can you tell me why, please? Is that an Evolution limitation or is was the message signed incorrectly?
it works fine for me with evolution 3.3.2. What is your version, please?
I am using Evolution 3.0.3 and Sylvia responding also to my message is using 2.32.2. I also filed this as bug #664657 [1].
What does it claim about the signature exactly, please?
The box is red and reads ÂInvalid signature (German: ÂUngÃltige SignaturÂ).
As an example, I see "Valid signature (David Woodhouse <...>)" on the inner message, but "Signature exists, but need public key" on your signature. I believe the later makes sense too, and can be probably the reason for your error claim. When you click the icon on the left from the signature claim inside the message, then you can see more details.
The certificate for Intel(?) seems to be missing. Unterzeichner: <unknown> <<unknown>>: Signaturzertifikat nicht gefunden Signee(?): <unknown> <<unknown>>: signature certificate not found So I guess the error message should be improved by adding the reason to it: ÂInvalid signature (certificate not found)Â. Thanks, Paul [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=664657
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part