New subject: [xwiki-users] Dead on-topic (was: Slightly off-topic: Digital ID required by some mail)

26 May 2006

Being in the industry as such, I feel a certain obligation to respond.

It appears that this is only a problem for the emails that Adrian Hall
is sending (sorry Adrian).  All of Adrian's emails are encrypted.  Not
to get too technical, but if the recipient doesn't have the private key
corresponding to the certificate used to encrypt the mail, then he or
she won't be able to open the email.  This is what Outlook means when it
complains about not being able to find your Digital ID.

The encryption is triggered either by the user explicitly asking for the
email to be encrypted, configuring his mail client to always encrypt
email, or an email gateway encrypting the message, so this may or may
not be under Adrian's control.  If it is a gateway, then the gateway can
likely be configured to not encrypt messages to this group.

Adrian, if you want help figuring out what's going on, I would tell you
that you can email me directly, but I'm unfortunately one of the one's
not able to read your messages.  If you can turn the encryption off to
email me directly... well then you don't need my help.

Cheers,
Perry

-----Original Message-----
From: Robin Fernandes [mailto:rewbs.soal@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 3:31 PM
To: xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org
Subject: Re: [xwiki-users] Dead on-topic (was: Slightly off-topic:
Digital ID required by some mail)

I'm using gmail and haven't noticed anything strange. Am I just not
seeing the protected emails at all? Could I be one of the ones sending
them and not even know? Will anyone ever be able to read this? :) Maybe
you could post the names of the senders concerned (assuming you can
actually see the sender field), just in case they don't realise
themselves that they are doing this.

On 26/05/06, THOMAS, BRIAN M (SBCSI) &lt;bt0008(a)att.com&gt; wrote:
...

 Though I generally eschew "me-too" posts, I feel the need to pile on 
 here, and partly because it's not just "me-too" but a bit of a more 
 detailed approach.

 I am unable to open them, though it may just be a matter of 
 configuration in my mail reader.  I haven't been able to find out how 
 it's done, though, and I'm beginning to suspect that it requires some 
 plugin or other that I don't have - which I would gladly acquire if 
 this weren't a fairly tightly-controlled standard corporate desktop machine.
...

 I think it's truly stupid of Outlook to refuse to open a message 
 merely because it can't verify it (and maybe that's the trick- find 
 the config option, if any, to tell it not to), particularly if it 
 thinks that I can't because it can't find my own "digital ID" which is

...
  in no way required for verification, and I certainly
wouldn't use it 
 if I weren't required to.  On the other hand, if the message is 
 actually encrypted as well, then Brandon is absolutely correct that 
 the messages can't be read except by those to whom it was specifically
addressed, which likely includes none of us, but
...
  only the mail-list daemon.   Fortunately it can store
the message's
 plaintext so that it can be read in the archive and in the digests.

 If the sender (or anyone else) knows, and can tell us, how those of us 
...
  with this particular affliction can read the messages
(with the 
 verification feature off, of course, so we can read it...!), I'd 
 appreciate it, and that would satisfy me.  And it certainly galls me 
 to suggest, or hear suggested, that a very valuable feature should not 
...
  be used because a significant number of people are
trapped in a 
 situation where they must use inferior products, thus forcing even 
 those who don't use the monopoly product to do without the feature.  
 Needless to say, I have been galled in this way a great deal during 
 the last couple of decades, to see the strength of this argument grow 
 stronger with the monopoly and in turn strengthen it, so that the 
 predatory business practices that engendered it are almost not even needed to
perpetuate it.
...

 So, if the message is indeed encrypted, please ignore the ranting in 
 the previous two paragraphs and stop doing that if you want all of us 
 who receive the mailing list directly to be able to read your 
 messages; if it's not, any help on how to beat Microsoft Outlook into 
 submission would be appreciated.

 brain[sic]

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Esbach, Brandon [mailto:Esbachb@tycoelectronics.com]
 Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 3:20 AM
 To: xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org
 Subject: [xwiki-users] Slightly off-topic: Digital ID required by some 
...
  mail

 Folks, a fair chunk of group emails the last few weeks have had 
 digital id control.
 From looking over the last few weeks, these are the emails that are 
 less likely to be responded to, as I suspect they are not readable 
 except by a select few.  I suspect the online archive is able to 
 display these messages fine enough, but to be honest (I'm not sure if 
 I'm alone here); unless I'm researching a problem before mailing the 
 group, I don't really go looking there for new posts.

 Suggestion:
 If it's to a mailing group I would consider not using this method, to 
 ensure whoever has a solution/suggestion can reply to you.

 --
 You receive this message as a subscriber of the 
 xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org mailing list.
 To unsubscribe:
 mailto:xwiki-users-unsubscribe@objectweb.org
 For general help: mailto:sympa@objectweb.org?subject=help
 ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: 
 http://www.objectweb.org/wws

RE: [xwiki-users] Dead on-topic (was: Slightly off-topic: Digital ID required by some mail)