Bug 467867

Not entirely convinced that such data-mangling really lives in the MTA. What _would_ be appropriate, however, would be something like DKIM. Last time I tried to get that to work, I failed -- but it would be good to have.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 8 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 8.  It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.  At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 
'version' of '8'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 8's end of life.

Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that 
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 8 is end of life.  If you 
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it 
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this 
bug to the applicable version.  If you are unable to change the version, 
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events.  Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

The process we are following is described here: 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

(In reply to comment #1)
> Not entirely convinced that such data-mangling really lives in the MTA. What
> _would_ be appropriate, however, would be something like DKIM. Last time I
> tried to get that to work, I failed -- but it would be good to have.

Do you have a better idea, where/how to implement this? I really need this feature, but I am not a mailserver expert. :-)

You _could_ do it in Exim, I'm just not convinced it's generic enough that we'd want to ship it. Alternatively, if you just want to catch locally-generated mail for root, perhaps you could replace /usr/sbin/sendmail with a script, which does the signing then invokes /usr/sbin/exim ?

(In reply to comment #4)
> You _could_ do it in Exim, I'm just not convinced it's generic enough that we'd
> want to ship it. Alternatively, if you just want to catch locally-generated
> mail for root, perhaps you could replace /usr/sbin/sendmail with a script,
> which does the signing then invokes /usr/sbin/exim ?

For only locally generated mail for root, I just use an extra user, were the encryption is done by filtering through a .forward file. But I would like this to have this for every locally generated mail or mail that is delivered to a local user and then forwarded, e.g. for mails from web applications, that run on the same host.

(In reply to David Woodhouse from comment #4)
> You _could_ do it in Exim, I'm just not convinced it's generic enough that
> we'd want to ship it. Alternatively, if you just want to catch
> locally-generated mail for root, perhaps you could replace
> /usr/sbin/sendmail with a script, which does the signing then invokes
> /usr/sbin/exim ?

I implemented this, therefore I do not need this in exim anymore. The source code of my solution is at:
https://github.com/tyll/encryptmail