[NTLUG:Discuss] SCO again

[Tom Adelstein]

madhat at unspecific.com wrote:
> On Thu, 2003-07-31 at 13:00, Alton R. Pouncey, II wrote:
> 
>>Didn't mean to sound like I was bitching.  It's just that your posts
>>(and many other folks) have really good information in them that I want
>>to see.  When nothing shows up, it frustrates me.  I'm not blaming you.
>>
>>I use Evolution so maybe that's part of the problem.  However, I have
>>become used to it and really don't feel like switching at this time. 
>>Even if I try to reply, I don't see the body of the message.
>>
> 
> 
> The issue is Evolution.  We went through this a little while back.   It
> is that the mailer some people use are using S/MIME to sign their
> messages and evolution does not support it.  I have tried talking to the
> developers about a simple patch that would just display the content
> instead of just dropping it, but they weren't interested.  S/MIME is not
> _widely_ used presently, so I guess they don't have enough pressure to
> fix it.  They have been talking about is since S/MIME came out several
> years ago, but has not been an issue until recently as more clients
> start implementing it (such as Netscape and Outlook).
> 
> Basically S/MIME is Secure MIME protocol that allows people to encrypt,
> decrypt and sign mail messages natively within the client, rather than
> having to use something like GPG.  It is based off of the existing and
> long standing MIME protocol.  OpenSSL supports it.  There is a Perl
> module specifically for it, the Net::SSLeay Perl module supports it I
> believe, there is Java support for it, mutt has added support for it,
> but Evolution does not.  gggrrrrr....
> 
> http://www.rsasecurity.com/standards/smime/faq.html
> 

That's interesting information. I can understand it from a sending 
point, but doesn't it seem logical that I would not be able to read your 
email? If you send me an email from evolution, why can't I see it?

hmmmmmm