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 228119 - attempt to decrypt nonencrypted message
attempt to decrypt nonencrypted message
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 217540
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: Mailer
unspecified
Other All
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: evolution-mail-maintainers
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2002-07-23 15:44 UTC by Tal Kelrich
Modified: 2002-07-23 17:17 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Tal Kelrich 2002-07-23 15:44:08 UTC
Package: Evolution
Priority: Minor
Version: 1.0.8
Synopsis: attempt to decrypt nonencrypted message
Bugzilla-Product: Evolution
Bugzilla-Component: Mailer

Description:
I was reading bugtraq and came across the attached message, Evolution
pops up a passphrase box, and after being canceled (by escape, neither
OK nor Cancel worked) added "Cannot decrypt this message: no password
provided" to the message.

email follows

Return-Path:
<bugtraq-return-5665-tal=musicgenome.com@securityfocus.com>
Received: from outgoing.securityfocus.com (outgoing3.securityfocus.com
        [66.38.151.27]) by mail.musicgenome.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with
ESMTP id
        g6NEecb08022 for <tal@musicgenome.com>; Tue, 23 Jul 2002
17:40:39 +0300
Received: from lists.securityfocus.com (lists.securityfocus.com
        [66.38.151.19]) by outgoing.securityfocus.com (Postfix) with
QMQP id
        4C9DEA30F9; Tue, 23 Jul 2002 09:19:07 -0600 (MDT)
Mailing-List: contact bugtraq-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <bugtraq.list-id.securityfocus.com>
List-Post: <mailto:bugtraq@securityfocus.com>
List-Help: <mailto:bugtraq-help@securityfocus.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bugtraq-unsubscribe@securityfocus.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bugtraq-subscribe@securityfocus.com>
Delivered-To: mailing list bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Delivered-To: moderator for bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Received: (qmail 5900 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2002 14:08:11 -0000
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 13:53:37 +0000
From: Phrack Staff <rm@segfault.net>
To: bugtraq@securityfocus.com
Subject: PHRACK 59 OFFICIAL RELEASE
Message-ID: <20020723135337.GA23595@segfault.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-0.1, required
7,
        SUBJ_ALL_CAPS)
X-UIDL: Va/!!(#9!!a5Q!!J1(!!
Status: U
X-Evolution-Source: pop://tal@localhost/inbox

Hello,

It has come to our attention that a pre-release version of phrack has
been leaked to the public. The extraction utility has been trojaned,
the
introduction heavily editted, and the purity of the articles and
accompanying
source code is questionable. This leaked and trojaned version of PHRACK
should be avoided by the public.

PHRACK 59 has been released in 3 steps:
2002-07-13: Limited release to contributing authors and volunteer
reviewers.
2002-07-19: PHRACK 59 Release Candidate 1 is privately release to a
larger
            audience for initial feed-back and review. (Not expected to
            stay private for long...)
            http://www.phrack.org/gogetit/phrack59.tar.gz.
2002-07-28: Public release on http://www.phrack.org main page for
everyone
            who missed the release on the 19th.


Phrack reminds people that the only official PHRACK release site is
http://www.phrack.org.


The latest issue has been put online on at:

http://www.phrack.org/gogetit/phrack59.tar.gz
http://dl.www.phrack.org/gogetit/phrack59.tar.gz

|=[ Table of Contents
]=-------------------------------------------------=|
| 0x01 Introduction                                  Phrack Staff 0x0b
kb |
| 0x02 Loopback                                      Phrack Staff 0x0f
kb |
| 0x03 Linenoise                                     Phrack Staff 0x6b
kb |
| 0x04 Handling the Interrupt Descriptor Table                kad 0x55
kb |
| 0x05 Advances in kernel hacking II                      palmers 0x15
kb |
| 0x06 Defeating Forensic Analysis on Unix       anonymous author 0x65
kb |
| 0x07 Advances in format string exploiting            gera & riq 0x1f
kb |
| 0x08 Runtime process infection                 anonymous author 0x2f
kb |
| 0x09 Bypassing PaX ASLR protection             anonymous author 0x26
kb |
| 0x0a Execution path analysis: finding kernel rk's J.K.Rutkowski 0x2a
kb |
| 0x0b Cuts like a knife, SSHarp                          stealth 0x0c
kb |
| 0x0c Building ptrace injecting shellcodes      anonymous author 0x17
kb |
| 0x0d Linux/390 shellcode development           johnny cyberpunk 0x14
kb |
| 0x0e Writing linux kernel keylogger                          rd 0x29
kb |
| 0x0f Cryptographic random number generators           DrMungkee 0x2d
kb |
| 0x10 Playing with windows /dev/(k)mem                 crazylord 0x42
kb |
| 0x11 Phrack World News                             Phrack Staff 0x18
kb |
| 0x12 Phrack magazine extraction utility            Phrack Staff 0x15
kb |
|=------------------------------------------------------------=[ 0x2EE
kb |


Enjoy the magazine!

MD5:
fa1d072634c3b9d837e4acb74b7041ab phrack59.tar.gz

PGP signed with the key in PHRACK 57 and 58:
$ gpg --verify phrack59.tar.gz.sig phrack59.tar.gz
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQA9PVmX0+DCTz7u3OERAoFRAKCGbAi/L1pszERcKkcsMv889+Ab+wCgkepH
iYUeNTnrfYdZ4VXVod05AM4=
=HvCB
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----



Setting qa contact to the default for this product.
   This bug either had no qa contact or an invalid one.

Comment 1 Jeffrey Stedfast 2002-07-23 17:17:06 UTC
that's because it has a PGP block inside the message.

anyways, we no longer even TRY to do this anymore so "FIXED" :-)

actually, gonna mark as a dup of bug#217540 as another example of WHY
inline PGP is broken.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 217540 ***