[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 09:16:13 +0100
From: Guilherme Andrade <g@...drade.net>
To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Enigmail warning
Reproducible on OS X 10.9.4 with Thunderbird 31 + Enigmail 1.7 as well.
Cheers,
On 20/08/14 07:21, securitylists wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We were able to reproduce the bug by trying to send an encrypted message to a bcc recipient. The message was promptly sent without encryption or confirmation. It is usually not very relevant to use bcc when sending messages encrypted with public keys but it can be chosen by accident and it shouldn't break the encryption like that.
>
> Please let me know if you are able to reproduce this.
>
> The client was Thunderbird 31.0 running on Ubuntu with Enigmail 1.7.
>
> Antti Kurittu
> Information Security Specialist
> National Cyber Security Center NCSC-FI
> Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority FICORA
> Itämerenkatu 3 A PL 313, 00181 Helsinki, Finland
> +358 29 539 0100
> http://www.cert.fi/en/
> PGP-fingerprint: 00CC B1BF 86B9 C3D8 3B4B 6A16 C496 0441 42CF CA51
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Boyce [mailto:nick.boyce@...il.com]
> Sent: 18. elokuuta 2014 20:00
> To: oss-security@...ts.openwall.com
> Subject: Re: [oss-security] Enigmail warning
>
> On 18 August 2014 07:22, Henri Salo <henri@...v.fi> wrote:
>
>> http://sourceforge.net/p/enigmail/forum/support/thread/3e7268a4/
>> Quote from thread below:
>> Enigmail 1.7 is completely broken for my purposes.
>> Steps to reproduce the problem:
>>
>> 1) Write an email in TB.
>> 2) Ensure "Force encryption" in Enigmail.
>> 3) Ensure "Force signing" in Enigmail.
>> 4) Recheck encryption and signing settings... OK.
>> 5) Send the email.
>> 6) Look at the received email. OOPS. It is NOT signed
>> and NOT encrypted.
>
> Um ... I see from the Enigmail "Announcements" forum [1] that some major changes have been made to the package over the last 24 months:
> specifically a decision was made to replace older C++ code (with maintainability issues) by new pure Javascript code, thus hopefully achieving platform, GPG and TB version independence
>
> You can see how that sort of upheaval in the codebase might result in horrible problems like this.
>
> [ I switched away from TB to Claws/Kmail some time ago, so this is all news to me, but up till that point the behaviour of TB V3 - 10 and Enigmail 1.0/1 in encrypting my mail was never less than excellent for me. ]
>
> More relevantly, the (primary ?) author specifically asked [2] for testers to step up and test the new Javascript version thoroughly
>
> "In order to reduce the risk of severe errors in
> the release versions, I will regularly ask for help
> in testing after I completed such changes."
>
> which leaves me wondering how many stepped up to perform that task. It would be interesting - and maybe alarming - to know.
>
> [1] http://sourceforge.net/p/enigmail/forum/announce/
> [2] https://www.enigmail.net/list_archive/2012-January/014667.html
>
> Nick
> --
> "Bob has a problem requiring secure communication.
> He decides to use certificates.
> Now Bob has two problems."
>
--
Guilherme
https://www.gandrade.net/
PGP: 0x35CB8191 / 1968 5252 3901 B40F ED8A D67A 9330 79B1 35CB 8191
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (456 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Please check out the
Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this
mailing list.
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
