bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

bug#67931: [PATCH] Use S/MIME key from content for mail signing via Open


From: Eric Abrahamsen
Subject: bug#67931: [PATCH] Use S/MIME key from content for mail signing via OpenSSL
Date: Tue, 07 May 2024 19:20:30 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)

Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:

> Illia Ostapyshyn <illia@yshyn.com> writes:
>
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>>> Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>, 17780@debbugs.gnu.org,
>>>>  Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>, Jan Beich <jbeich@vfemail.net>,
>>>>  67931@debbugs.gnu.org
>>>> From: Illia Ostapyshyn <illia@yshyn.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 06 May 2024 20:46:33 +0200
>>>> 
>>>> Sorry, forgot to attach the patch, sending it with this email.
>>>
>>> Thanks, I'm adding Eric to the discussion.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> I've realized that reusing certfile parameter for signing will have
>> unintended side-effects when encrypting and signing a message.  When a
>> single signencrypt MML tag is used for both this results in all
>> certfiles passed to both `smime-encrypt-buffer' and `smime-sign-buffer'.
>>
>> I'm sending a new patch that introduces a parameter called chainfile for
>> signatures instead.
>
> Thanks for the report, and the code. I haven't been able to get the
> reproducer to work so far (in Emacs -Q), because it always ends up at
> `mml-smime-sign-query' instead of `mml-smime-sign-buffer', and the
> latter seems to be the only way to (eventually) end up at
> `mml-smime-openssl-sign', where the problem is:
>
> - mml-smime-sign-buffer
> - mml-smime-sign
> - (funcall (nth 1 (assq 'openssl mml-smime-function-alist)))
> - mml-smime-openssl-sign
>
> `mml-smime-sign' is the only place that does (nth 1 (assq 'openssl
> mml-smime-function-alist))
>
> The only way to call `mml-smime-sign-buffer' instead of
> `mml-smime-sign-query' is if some code ran:
>
> (funcall (nth 1 (assoc "smime" mml-sign-alist)))
>
> And so far as I can tell, no code does that.
>
> Obviously you arrived at that function somehow, otherwise we wouldn't
> have this bug report, but so far I can't figure out how!

Bah, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that was only half the recipe. Hang on...





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]