3:37 a.m.
???
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:15:34AM -0700, Fedora Account System wrote:
With regards to "Re: You need to create a bugzilla account for
Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net".
Your message could not be processed.
Reason:
The signature could not be processed. The signature may have been created or attached
improperly, it might not match the key ID you have registered in the Account System, or
the public key may not have been found on the key server. For guidance, please see the
following page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/CLAHowTo
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
4:17 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
On 6/30/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
???
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:15:34AM -0700, Fedora Account System wrote:
> With regards to "Re: You need to create a bugzilla account for
Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net".
>
> Your message could not be processed.
>
> Reason:
>
> The signature could not be processed. The signature may have been created or
attached improperly, it might not match the key ID you have registered in the Account
System, or the public key may not have been found on the key server. For guidance, please
see the following page:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/CLAHowTo
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
I see "cla_done" in your Fedora Account[1] already.
Are you trying to request another CLA?
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount
Regards,
--
Thomas Chung
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung
4:47 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 02:17:11AM -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
On 6/30/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
>???
>
>On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:15:34AM -0700, Fedora Account System wrote:
>> With regards to "Re: You need to create a bugzilla account for
>Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net".
>>
>> Your message could not be processed.
>>
>> Reason:
>>
>> The signature could not be processed. The signature may have been
>created or attached improperly, it might not match the key ID you have
>registered in the Account System, or the public key may not have been
>found on the key server. For guidance, please see the following page:
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/CLAHowTo
>
I see "cla_done" in your Fedora Account[1] already.
Are you trying to request another CLA?
[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount
Regards,
No, I just replied to the self-proclaimed amazingly stupid mail I
received about not having a bugzilla account anymore. So now I have to
shiver in agony whether both my bugzilla account *and* cla_done bit
are scheduled for erasure? Not.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
5:25 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
Axel Thimm wrote:
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 02:17:11AM -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
> On 6/30/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
>> ???
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:15:34AM -0700, Fedora Account System wrote:
>>> With regards to "Re: You need to create a bugzilla account for
>> Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net".
>>> Your message could not be processed.
>>>
>>> Reason:
>>>
>>> The signature could not be processed. The signature may have been
>>> created or attached improperly, it might not match the key ID you have
>>> registered in the Account System, or the public key may not have been
>>> found on the key server. For guidance, please see the following page:
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/CLAHowTo
> I see "cla_done" in your Fedora Account[1] already.
> Are you trying to request another CLA?
>
> [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount
>
> Regards,
No, I just replied to the self-proclaimed amazingly stupid mail I
received about not having a bugzilla account anymore. So now I have to
shiver in agony whether both my bugzilla account *and* cla_done bit
are scheduled for erasure? Not.
According to the error message you forwarded, it is due to the fact that
your email was not signed with the GPG key in FAS ("it might not match
the key ID you have registered in the Account System, or the public key
may not have been found on the key server.")
N.J.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list
Fedora-infrastructure-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
7:07 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 10:25:42PM +1200, Nigel Jones wrote:
Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 02:17:11AM -0700, Thomas Chung wrote:
>> On 6/30/07, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
>>> ???
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 01:15:34AM -0700, Fedora Account System wrote:
>>>> With regards to "Re: You need to create a bugzilla account for
>>> Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net".
>>>> Your message could not be processed.
>>>>
>>>> Reason:
>>>>
>>>> The signature could not be processed. The signature may have been
>>>> created or attached improperly, it might not match the key ID you have
>>>> registered in the Account System, or the public key may not have been
>>>> found on the key server. For guidance, please see the following page:
>>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/CLAHowTo
>> I see "cla_done" in your Fedora Account[1] already.
>> Are you trying to request another CLA?
>>
>> [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount
>>
>> Regards,
>
> No, I just replied to the self-proclaimed amazingly stupid mail I
> received about not having a bugzilla account anymore. So now I have to
> shiver in agony whether both my bugzilla account *and* cla_done bit
> are scheduled for erasure? Not.
>
According to the error message you forwarded, it is due to the fact that
your email was not signed with the GPG key in FAS ("it might not match
the key ID you have registered in the Account System, or the public key
may not have been found on the key server.")
I know, there are two bugs here:
a) I replied to the "amazingly stupid" mail I received and got the
above reply, at the very least the From/Reply-To was broken.
b) I did sign the mail and the gpg key is actually the one registred
at FAS, I just checked my FAS details.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
9:15 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
Once upon a time Saturday 30 June 2007, Axel Thimm wrote:
a) I replied to the "amazingly stupid" mail I received and
got the
above reply, at the very least the From/Reply-To was broken.
b) I did sign the mail and the gpg key is actually the one registred
at FAS, I just checked my FAS details.
Axel,
on every email you send i get "Message was signed by
Axel.Thimm(a)physik.fu-berlin.de (Key ID: 0x401552D4639A99F1).
Warning: The signature is bad." perhaps thats what happened. any way its
not something that should have happened and we will have to try and determine
why you got emailed in the first place.
Dennis
9:47 a.m.
New subject: Error processing Fedora Account System email
On Sat, Jun 30, 2007 at 09:15:17AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Once upon a time Saturday 30 June 2007, Axel Thimm wrote:
> a) I replied to the "amazingly stupid" mail I received and got the
> above reply, at the very least the From/Reply-To was broken.
>
> b) I did sign the mail and the gpg key is actually the one registred
> at FAS, I just checked my FAS details.
Axel,
on every email you send i get "Message was signed by
Axel.Thimm(a)physik.fu-berlin.de (Key ID: 0x401552D4639A99F1).
Warning: The signature is bad." perhaps thats what happened.
Hm, you either never refresh the public key cache, or your MUA/the gpg
checking script can't cope with multiple uids in a key (unlikely, but
has happened in rpm code before, so it's always worth checking).
Try
gpg --refresh-keys
and see what happens. I bet at least your MUA will get back to senses.
any way its not something that should have happened and we will have
to try and determine why you got emailed in the first place.
But let me add
c) why on earth is my reply to the broken cron job being gpg checked
at the first place?
Let me recapitulate:
o Some scripts decides that I don't have a bufgzilla account and sends
me instructiosn to setup a bugzilla account under the name of my
already exiting bugzilla acount. OK, a bug in the script with a
false positive.
o Replying to the mail applies some gpg checking to it (???). I would
expect the destination of automated mail to be either noreply or if
not to reach some person that can fix it. But somehow the
destination is a gpg checking script, perhaps a mismatch of
addresses (in the orginal script-mail) and the mail was sent to the
CLS checking script ...
o Finally the gpg check fails on a valid signature. Perhaps because
the public gpg cache was filled with my key ages ago, perhaps
because it now fails to detect multiple uids in the key (which was
the same when I signed the CLA, so it would be a regression).
Now three bugs in one? Why, am I a lucky bastard.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
6142
days inactive
6142
days old
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Axel Thimm -
Dennis Gilmore -
Nigel Jones -
Thomas Chung