After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 551518 - [groupwise] Decodes/Encodes signed/encrypted messages incorrectly from/to EGWItem
[groupwise] Decodes/Encodes signed/encrypted messages incorrectly from/to EGW...
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: evolution-groupwise
Classification: Deprecated
Component: Groupwise Plugins/Features
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution Groupwise development team
Evolution QA team
gnome[unmaintained]
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2008-09-09 14:35 UTC by Dominique Leuenberger
Modified: 2013-07-23 14:40 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.23/2.24


Attachments
proposed eds patch (946 bytes, patch)
2009-06-03 14:26 UTC, Milan Crha
none Details | Review
proposed evo patch (8.31 KB, patch)
2009-06-03 14:34 UTC, Milan Crha
none Details | Review
bad sig from evo (951 bytes, text/plain)
2009-06-04 18:47 UTC, das_deniz
  Details
bad sig by evo displayed in evo (89.98 KB, image/png)
2009-06-04 18:48 UTC, das_deniz
  Details
good sig from tbird (1.46 KB, text/plain)
2009-06-04 18:49 UTC, das_deniz
  Details
good sig by tbird displayed in evo (110.49 KB, image/png)
2009-06-04 18:50 UTC, das_deniz
  Details
mine from evo (896 bytes, text/plain)
2009-06-05 09:35 UTC, Milan Crha
  Details
test GW camel provider patch (1.25 KB, text/plain)
2009-06-08 11:28 UTC, Milan Crha
  Details
test GW camel provider patch ][ (1.42 KB, text/plain)
2009-06-09 11:06 UTC, Milan Crha
  Details
Sample mbox (5.54 KB, application/octet-stream)
2009-06-24 04:34 UTC, Akhil Laddha
  Details

Description Dominique Leuenberger 2008-09-09 14:35:03 UTC
Test:

- Create a new message with Evolution
- Sign and encrypt it
- send it

The mail is stored in the 'Sent Items' folder (I work with a GroupWise server
here).

When opening that mail, you can see two attachments (FILE and encrypted.asc).
Evolution does NOT detect that it should ask to decrypt that mail.

Apparently, the headers seem not to be correct:

A mail sent with evolution contains:
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=__Part5E77AD76.0__="

A mail written using IMP contains:
Content-Type: multipart/encrypted;
        boundary="=_6n84u8qo6b8c";
        protocol="application/pgp-encrypted"
Content-Description: PGP Signed/Encrypted Data

The one I send using IMP is also detected by Evolution... thus I 'GUESS' the
header might be of some relevance to detect if the mail is encrypted ;)

The mail sent from Evolution to my imp account is also not deetcted as
'encrypted' on that account.

This renders gpg support inside Evolution to a pretty useless low level, as
recipients are most likely not able to open the mails correct.

rpm -q evolution -> evolution-2.22.3.1-2.1
Comment 1 André Klapper 2008-09-09 16:29:05 UTC
what distro is this?
Comment 2 Dominique Leuenberger 2008-09-09 18:52:30 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> what distro is this?
> 

I'm using openSUSE 11.0 for those tests.
Comment 3 Kandepu Prasad 2008-09-10 06:48:59 UTC
downstream bug
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421106
Comment 4 Dominique Leuenberger 2008-10-20 14:57:32 UTC
Just build an RPM of gnokii 0.6.27, recompiled g-p-m against it (libgnokii.so.4).

The result stays the same: I get empty box informing me about a new message, but no content in the box.
Comment 5 Dominique Leuenberger 2008-10-20 14:59:37 UTC
sorry.. I'm sleepy :( comment #4 should not have gone into this report.
Comment 6 Dominique Leuenberger 2008-10-20 15:00:41 UTC
Made tests using Evolution 2.24.0, the mails appear as before, so there has been no change since then.

gpg support is rather useless like this.
Comment 7 Milan Crha 2009-03-31 12:50:56 UTC
Works fine for me with IMAP. Might be a GroupWise issue? Could you try to send me such signed & encrypted message, please? (Please do write the bug number in the subject, otherwise I'll not recognize and will delete it as a spam.)
Comment 8 Milan Crha 2009-03-31 14:32:43 UTC
Thanks, I got your mail.

> this mail is pgp signed. Neither when I get it in Evolution (so with my
> sending groupwise account) nor on my horde/imp install the mails are
> correctly identified as signed.

Confirming, same here, the only thing I see is an attachment,
   "detached OpenPGP signature attachment (signature.asc)"
but no signature information in evolution, as for you.

I know you stated this comes from Evolution, but I do not see there any X-Mailer or something indicating that the message was created with it, so I'm sorry to ask, but was this created in Evolution? Because for me it creates correct messages. (If it was created in Evolution, using GroupWise, then it really can be GroupWise issue.)

Also, I've such a feeling there is some bug for detached signatures already, but it's too early to decide anyway.
Comment 9 Dominique Leuenberger 2009-03-31 15:15:35 UTC
(In reply to comment #8)
> Confirming, same here, the only thing I see is an attachment,
>    "detached OpenPGP signature attachment (signature.asc)"
> but no signature information in evolution, as for you.
> 
> I know you stated this comes from Evolution, but I do not see there any
> X-Mailer or something indicating that the message was created with it, so I'm
> sorry to ask, but was this created in Evolution? Because for me it creates
> correct messages. (If it was created in Evolution, using GroupWise, then it
> really can be GroupWise issue.)

Yes, this mail was created by with Evolution 2.26.0
GroupWise Internet Agents typically replace the X-Mailer header with GroupWise Internet Agent. That's probably what you see.
Comment 10 Dominique Leuenberger 2009-03-31 15:25:16 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > what distro is this?
> > 
> 
> I'm using openSUSE 11.0 for those tests.
> 

In the meantime this actually also changed to openSUSE 11.2 alpha 0.. but as in all th is time there was no change, I doubt that matters,
Comment 11 H.Habighorst 2009-06-02 14:41:50 UTC
Someone has reported in IRC ( lenny ) that this problem seems still to persist, with exchange.

After some digging around it seems that multipart / mixed is the fallback type in e-composer.c if the source is not valid / could not be decrypted etc - so there must be something gone wrong.

Comment 12 Milan Crha 2009-06-02 16:28:43 UTC
Eh, clever exchange. I just tried to drag&drop the correct message I'm able to see from my local folder to the exchange IMAP Inbox, and guess what, the message is not readable in evolution there, even I dropped there the correct message. What a nice thing of the exchange.

And to be on the safe side, neither thunderbird 2.0.0.19 can read the message properly.
Comment 13 Milan Crha 2009-06-03 14:26:22 UTC
Created attachment 135882 [details] [review]
proposed eds patch

for evolution-data-server;

first of all, when reading signature file, use content of the part, not part itself, to let the decoded file be in the "native" encoding, not the transfer-encoding (for these cases it's base64, where gpg really cannot find its tags).
Comment 14 Milan Crha 2009-06-03 14:34:09 UTC
Created attachment 135883 [details] [review]
proposed evo patch

for evolution;

And then, when found the multipart/mixed, traverse all the sub-parts and when something seems to be a signature or an encrypted part, then try to manage it as that. It works for encrypted very well. For signed-only it recognizes parts properly, but claims the signature is invalid. I tried couple changes, but it seems the server changed content too much, thus it claims properly.

Maybe using base64 transfer encoding for signed-only messages might work, though I didn't change it yet, before knowing other people opinion.
Comment 15 das_deniz 2009-06-04 13:08:32 UTC
not being an evolution developer i don't intend to apply a patch and build this - but you can check this with a groupwise mailbox account - this bug is very similar to another reported ( http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=332336 ) where there are attachments of email generated by thunderbird (correct) and evolution (incorrect) and even images showing how the signed email displays differently within evolution.

please check the patch against the other bug reported too and see if this resolves both issues (my guess is that if http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1847.html is being followed with this patch then it is a true fix - and if not ... then it still needs work.)

thank you
Comment 16 Milan Crha 2009-06-04 17:25:45 UTC
(In reply to comment #15)
> not being an evolution developer i don't intend to apply a patch and build this
> - but you can check this with a groupwise mailbox account - this bug is very
> similar to another reported ( http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=332336
> ) where there are attachments of email generated by thunderbird (correct) and
> evolution (incorrect) and even images showing how the signed email displays
> differently within evolution.

I do not have access to novell's bugzilla, could you upload two samples here, please?
Comment 17 Milan Crha 2009-06-04 17:32:28 UTC
(In reply to comment #15)
> please check the patch against the other bug reported too and see if this
> resolves both issues (my guess is that if http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1847.html
> is being followed with this patch then it is a true fix - and if not ... then
> it still needs work.)

By the way, this is maybe not obvious from my previous comments, but server sends something different from that what evo generated. In other words, server modifies message in some way, which is not a good thing, as also mentioned in the rfc. I do not think evolution does anything definitely wrong, though I'm interested how tb-generated message looks like, that server doesn't break it.
Comment 18 das_deniz 2009-06-04 18:47:11 UTC
Created attachment 135967 [details]
bad sig from evo
Comment 19 das_deniz 2009-06-04 18:48:21 UTC
Created attachment 135968 [details]
bad sig by evo displayed in evo
Comment 20 das_deniz 2009-06-04 18:49:24 UTC
Created attachment 135969 [details]
good sig from tbird
Comment 21 das_deniz 2009-06-04 18:50:18 UTC
Created attachment 135970 [details]
good sig by tbird displayed in evo
Comment 22 das_deniz 2009-06-04 18:58:41 UTC
emails/sigs and images attached now - note those email/sigs are not the ones displayed in the png files.

also i've had this issue with evolution + groupwise mailbox for evo versions 2.22, 2.24 and currently 2.26... (vs the reported 2.22 version).
Comment 23 Milan Crha 2009-06-05 09:35:28 UTC
Created attachment 136007 [details]
mine from evo

Thanks for the update. This is what evo generates to me, when sending PGP signed message. It's pretty similar to the one what generates tb.
Comment 24 Milan Crha 2009-06-05 09:51:50 UTC
I wonder, when you setup your "Sent" folder for the GW account to some local (On This Computer) folder and try to send signed message to yourself with that GW account, will be the source of a message same in the sent folder as the one received? I guess they will be different, which means server changes it for some reason.

I do not know why, but I cannot reproduce mine comment #12 now. Strange.
Comment 25 das_deniz 2009-06-05 12:22:57 UTC
you do not have the option to change the Sent folder with the GW mailbox.
Comment 26 Milan Crha 2009-06-05 13:00:35 UTC
I do not have any GW mailbox at all, I use Akhil to help me with test data. :)
Comment 27 Milan Crha 2009-06-08 11:28:34 UTC
Created attachment 136138 [details]
test GW camel provider patch

for evolution-data-server;

OK, I found where is the difference. It's done when the GWItem is transformed to a camel message, it sets there "multipart/digest", and changes boundaries and so on, then it truly cannot get the correct signature when the signed only part is a multipart. Anyway, this patch should change "multipart/digest" to "multipart/signed" if the multipart looks like that. I didn't test it, just wondering whether it's able to work properly.

And I'm sorry to say, but as I do not have the GW account, I cannot finish this.

With respect of "thunderbird working correctly", are you connecting to the server with IMAP there, or POP3 or such? I believe, when you'll also use the same account type in Evolution, not the "native" GroupWise, then it'll be working properly from evo too.

About the previous "cannot change sent folder in GW", I'm sorry, I misunderstood your comment, as I realized its correct meaning today.
Comment 28 Milan Crha 2009-06-09 11:06:57 UTC
Created attachment 136207 [details]
test GW camel provider patch ][

the previous 'test GW camel provider patch' broke the message body. This should be a bit better.
Comment 29 Akhil Laddha 2009-06-24 04:34:17 UTC
Created attachment 137287 [details]
Sample mbox 

Attached sample mbox doesn't show properly. It displays as below 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



Hi,

The <http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/GNOME:/STABLE/> is empty.

And <http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/GNOME:/STABLE:/> does not 
have 11.0

:-/

- -- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E. R.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAko8yDsACgkQtTMYHG2NR9VPggCdF18uvF41Lo1/l086s6KyJecC
SnEAn26f+BGj/TGhHB1HzGBST+mLkEnk
=J2Ot
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment 30 Milan Crha 2009-06-24 10:15:59 UTC
During all the above investigation I forgot to update this bug. I'm obsoleting initial patches, and changing the summary, as this is "just" an interoperability issue with a GroupWise. Let someone from GW group know to look at it, it's out of my knowledge here, not talking about the environment. I'm sorry.
Comment 31 André Klapper 2013-07-23 14:40:00 UTC
evolution-groupwise provides connectivity to Novell Groupwise servers. The last stable release of evolution-groupwise was 3.4.2 which took place a year ago.

evolution-groupwise is not under active development anymore.

It is currently unlikely that there will be any further active development.

Closing this report as WONTFIX as part of Bugzilla Housekeeping.

Please feel free to reopen this bug report in the future if anyone takes the responsibility for active development again.