Re: New thread about PGP sigs, part 1: Mutt disagrees with g…

Top Page
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Author: Ian Zimmerman
Date:  
To: mutt-users
Subject: Re: New thread about PGP sigs, part 1: Mutt disagrees with gpg
On 2016-09-22 23:02, Ian Zimmerman wrote:

> I have to declare mutt innocent in this instance. What happened was
> that something in the transit or delivery path applied the following
> transformations:
>
> 1. Where a leading dot was QP-encoded as =2E, unapplied the encoding and
> changed it into a literal dot.
>
> 2. Reflowed binary base-64 encoded parts from 72 chars per line to 60.
>
> It is not surprising that the signature no longer matches after these
> changes :-)


And now I found another similar case:

http://marc.info/?l=mutt-users&m=147458400528234&q=raw

Here, my copy has the leading "=66rom" decoded into "from", and the
trailing ": =20" encoded (!) into ":=20=20".

GRRR. I know there's sendmail (the real thing, but the latest version)
in the path between the list server and me. Is sendmail known for such
tricks?

--
Please *no* private Cc: on mailing lists and newsgroups
Why does the arrow on Hillary signs point to the right?