From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6ECB6DE135A for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:21:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at cworth.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.137 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.137 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.683, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from arlo.cworth.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (arlo.cworth.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2ZTB7_ca7rAS for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:21:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by arlo.cworth.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44CBB6DE1359 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:21:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B6A22090A; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:21:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:21:01 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=w2C321FOkX5RUb33PRkK6ENh27E=; b=bRmjb9 tYei/BZKeRvF7QFfJyvflSJTf0Kjf2t9qq2k16p5EU5gXEoAmsEQGWpSGY+BCq4d pJiAeq7zCeuVH3En8pictkc6HREfrSa4SLAX4oRrCmAW7o60H4hCvNDh27GvL8vu syw2jwAEN/1D1SFIfrkNtK2DUUYgK68+ZA06o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=w2C321FOkX5RUb 33PRkK6ENh27E=; b=BFi1gwRQanaWPT0EPBYrpK/0BSfE19IfhIMTPTy9/CuAgy t+uly+PmVlWXVJBoS/5JRD2jCoChjrYVi5+YF7iIezrRjsPliKc+GA8ZAPiuNX+x DdAIPXN2SiyHuGmFVvxem1B7XCHvRyombkb9yBEVXMftL094L30WLnaGqEbKI= X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: oEd1978DBpcZBqdZSJvWmRMUaB3KZN3RfpZdmFC9Ht80 1479849661 Received: from localhost (128.92-221-147.customer.lyse.net [92.221.147.128]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 1CFA67E3FA; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:21:01 -0500 (EST) From: Marius Bakke To: David Bremner , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: T350 test failures with gnupg-2.1.16 In-Reply-To: <87bmx7l0am.fsf@tesseract.cs.unb.ca> References: <87shqj5nha.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87h96zl1zr.fsf@tesseract.cs.unb.ca> <87wpfvnujm.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <87bmx7l0am.fsf@tesseract.cs.unb.ca> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.23.2 (https://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.1.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 22:20:59 +0100 Message-ID: <87r363nrd0.fsf@kirby.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 21:21:03 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David Bremner writes: > Marius Bakke writes: > >> David Bremner writes: >> >>> Marius Bakke writes: >>> >>>> Hello! >>>> >>>> After updating to gnupg 2.1.16, T350-crypto.sh fails in some of the >>>> signature verification steps with wrong content-length: >>>> >>>> T350-crypto: Testing PGP/MIME signature verification and decryption >>>> PASS emacs delivery of signed message >>>> FAIL signature verification >>>> --- T350-crypto.2.expected 2016-11-22 18:59:48.341851653 = +0000 >>>> +++ T350-crypto.2.output 2016-11-22 18:59:48.341851653 = +0000 >>>> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ >>>> "id": 2 >>>> }, >>>> { >>>> - "content-length": 280, >>>> + "content-length": 312, >>>> "content-type": "application/= pgp-signature", >>> >>> These failures are not duplicated for me in debian sid, also with gpg >>> 2.1.16. From IRC I believe Marius is running GuixSD. >> >> This is correct. Strange that it's not reproducible on Debian. Any tips >> for how to troubleshoot this further? Is the content-length based on >> signature only? I'll see if I can extract the raw output somehow. > > You could start with the following, from inside tmp.T350-crypto > > % grep -R "Subject: test signed message 001" mail=20 > % ../../devel/printmimestructure < mail/sent/cur/$the_file_matched_by_grep > > That will tell us if the mismatch is in the created file or in the later > parsing. Thanks for this! It seems the signature is 32 bytes longer in 2.1.16. ../../devel/printmimestructure < mail/sent/cur/1479841188.2873_194073_1.loc= alhost\:2\,S =E2=94=94=E2=94=AC=E2=95=B4multipart/signed 778 bytes =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80=E2=95=B4text/plain 31 bytes =E2=94=94=E2=94=80=E2=95=B4application/pgp-signature [signature.asc] 312 b= ytes vs... ../../devel/printmimestructure < mail/sent/cur/1479848474.6836_793177_1.loc= alhost\:2\,S =E2=94=94=E2=94=AC=E2=95=B4multipart/signed 747 bytes =E2=94=9C=E2=94=80=E2=95=B4text/plain 31 bytes =E2=94=94=E2=94=80=E2=95=B4application/pgp-signature [signature.asc] 280 b= ytes The signatures of each email: 2.1.16: =2D-=3D-=3D-=3D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=3D"signature.asc" =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iLMEAQEIAB0WIQRa6rEfXjPc6HXdt1ttkmEtlORjgQUCWDSVpAAKCRBtkmEtlORj gf90A/4twA6txofm53BhqVAOUwdQNmA2H/yDhP29k6ctZ+XeTw77VZgrFMERoll7 lG6MEsH4JiMasJoevOohRsNmA9F3cEy5b38+c5KuaUlz5jVAKLZ4e8jkZmw2t8L+ hDbtLt7vzd72as8i9yNfKhf1DqAU9ayCJgXOMN4ql/uZqbWIqQ=3D=3D =3Do1L0 =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- =2D-=3D-=3D-=3D-- 2.1.15: =2D-=3D-=3D-=3D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=3D"signature.asc" =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iJwEAQEIAAYFAlg0shoACgkQbZJhLZTkY4H4ewQAoWTNwOtQAH/fwlgkqBuWLoWB 7CrrW3Lj1vEVaTRkaBIFP7NiYTDGZtWP6KCZ7G9HXsyprsg5HtVIp3wl4DHKmK/u XipG0l3PNkSv9+SuUVxI4E9dj0kTJzNLqZaRYf3kmQJTs/jTyxQCuqPd1JF5kD9e Nkd1585nFCNQAdNJgIE=3D =3D8npB =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- =2D-=3D-=3D-=3D-- Reading through the ChangeLog, I can't see anything obviously related. One workaround could be setting an explicit key algorithm instead of relying on the default. I'll have a go at this. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEu7At3yzq9qgNHeZDoqBt8qM6VPoFAlg0trsACgkQoqBt8qM6 VPp1vAf/fVSS25p0uHH4Cln/AiQyZ9SUSz5/J3kq/qNuxchrBhun4nHvARXpFN6N KgRiZhylpq8PnD/b14sONB8AN0Y8NhmlqCjc/WA7ZodDh7Xz9VPZK6Gib69rzxas 6U/0ekdbtUhs8liPVrG27qH+hpcxLHOwamxHOJrD9D4usHOxWZxXu8wJejG323um QXfeZe8N8G8hiHGbBb/5mjzEMfLMFoBbkQSSBqjzyC8JtsoZOIH9Gzq/nWFSVWrk S44FNkKNprG9xcCWJ2JgPi00+WhciHRbQ+YwNf805ausEKDNmWZ/k8DrR2HoM5My QSU/F5z4oN/uE1VEMDinUXV1KSejeA== =MPW5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--