[foaf-protocols] This message should be signed
Bruno.Harbulot at manchester.ac.uk
Sat Jun 20 18:55:47 CEST 2009
Just to add that my previous message has been put in a multi-part
message by the mailing list system (which added its signature as another
multi-part). Yet, the signature of the original message is present and
valid (it applies to the initial part).
Bruno Harbulot wrote:
> Toby Inkster wrote:
>> On Sat, 2009-06-20 at 09:14 +0100, Toby Inkster wrote:
>>> This message is a test. It should be signed with my FOAF+SSL-enabled
>>> X.509 key.
>> Hmmm... but wasn't.
>> Some SSL error message came up in Evolution when sending it, but it
>> didn't give me the chance to stop it sending.
>> Oh well, the principle still seems sound. FOAF+SSL could provide us with
>> a unified trust model for web and e-mail, which is a potential killer
>> feature over competing technologies (but not an ov:KillerGorilla).
> In Thunderbird 2:
> 1. Import your own certificate in PEM format in 'Authorities'.
> 2. Import your own certificate+key (from PKCS#12 file) in 'Your
> certificates' (if you had done this before, back it up, delete it and
> re-import it after step 1).
> 3. In your account settings: 'Security' -> 'Digital signing' ->
> 'Select...' (pick the appropriate certificate).
> When sending a message, expand the 'Security' button and choose
> 'Digitally sign this message' if it's not the default you have selected.
> Note that the receiver will still be confused since there's no embedded
> mechanism to verify that certificate.
> It's possible in theory to do the verification in Thunderbird (or other
> e-mail clients), but this would require changes in its code (or perhaps
> a plugin). After verifying the certificate by dereferencing the FOAF
> file, one would need to check that its WebID can be associated with the
> e-mail address of the sender (this information can be provided by the
> FOAF document).
> Best wishes,
More information about the foaf-protocols