bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

[Uwe Brauer]

Hi

There is a ongoing discussion about a bug which was introduced in commit 
74579d3d2bb82f300a6f2d81b7b559f0a24061db 

And which causes smime to fail (message are not signed nor encrypted),
although this commits should only concern openpg.

Moreover it not clear whether this commit is compatible with older
openpg version, that don't possess the --sender option (for example in
RH 7).

There is however a quick «fix»


       (mml-secure-smime-sign-with-sender nil)
       *did not help*, although I am using smime not opengpg.
       But
       (mml-secure-openpgp-sign-with-sender nil)
       *did help*.

       This should be mentioned in the documentation (NEWS and in the
       relevant doc strings)

So far Teemu already sent a patch to the bugs list. It would be good if
either this patch were applied as soon as possible or, even better, the
patch were to be discussed, since it might causes problems with older
openpgp versions.

Regards

Uwe Brauer 

Re: bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es>
> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 09:53:20 +0200
> 
> There is a ongoing discussion about a bug which was introduced in commit 
> 74579d3d2bb82f300a6f2d81b7b559f0a24061db 

Indeed.  And there's no need to split that discussion into 2 mailing
lists.  Those who are relevant to making the decision about the fix
read the bug list anyway.

> There is however a quick «fix»
> 
> 
>        (mml-secure-smime-sign-with-sender nil)
>        *did not help*, although I am using smime not opengpg.
>        But
>        (mml-secure-openpgp-sign-with-sender nil)
>        *did help*.
> 
>        This should be mentioned in the documentation (NEWS and in the
>        relevant doc strings)
> 
> So far Teemu already sent a patch to the bugs list. It would be good if
> either this patch were applied as soon as possible or, even better, the
> patch were to be discussed, since it might causes problems with older
> openpgp versions.

Two comments (1) please wait for at least a few days before deciding
that the matter stalled and needs to be expedited, let alone in
another list; and (2) I personally didn't get the impression that the
proposed fix is final and/or agreed upon, due to the issue with the
version of gpg.

Meanwhile, you have the patch, and can apply it locally if it's urgent
for you.

Re: bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

[Uwe Brauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 840 bytes --]



   > Indeed.  And there's no need to split that discussion into 2 mailing
   > lists.  Those who are relevant to making the decision about the fix
   > read the bug list anyway.
Ok.


   > Two comments (1) please wait for at least a few days before deciding
   > that the matter stalled and needs to be expedited, let alone in
   > another list; and (2) I personally didn't get the impression that the
   > proposed fix is final and/or agreed upon, due to the issue with the
   > version of gpg.

There was a second patch which checked the pgp version. However it is
not clear to me what was agreed on. So what is the general polics in
such a case. A change was introduced, which presented a bug for some use
case, a fix was not agreed or applied.

So shouldn't that commit not be removed, at least temporally, till a fix
is agreed upon?

[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5025 bytes --]

Re: bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es>
> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 14:29:48 +0200
> 
> There was a second patch which checked the pgp version. However it is
> not clear to me what was agreed on. So what is the general polics in
> such a case.

We wait for a few days (a week or two) and if no one objects, we push.

> A change was introduced, which presented a bug for some use case, a
> fix was not agreed or applied.
> 
> So shouldn't that commit not be removed, at least temporally, till a fix
> is agreed upon?

Only if the problem is grave and very urgent.  In this case, I don't
think it is, and you can revert that commit locally in the meantime if
it gets in your way too much.

Re: bug#37025: 27.0.50; smime signing and encryption does not work any longer

[Teemu Likonen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 838 bytes --]

Uwe Brauer [2019-08-18T14:29:48+02] wrote:

> There was a second patch which checked the pgp version. However it is
> not clear to me what was agreed on. So what is the general polics in
> such a case. A change was introduced, which presented a bug for some use
> case, a fix was not agreed or applied.

Maybe nobody has even read the patch code yet, except me. The patch adds
a couple of "if" conditions so that --sender option is only used with
OpenPGP protocol (that is, with gpg and not with gpgsm) and only with
gpg version 2.1.15 and higher because that version added the option.

https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=37025#23

-- 
///  OpenPGP key: 4E1055DC84E9DFF613D78557719D69D324539450
//  https://keys.openpgp.org/search?q=tlikonen@iki.fi
/  https://keybase.io/tlikonen  https://github.com/tlikonen

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 694 bytes --]