mirror of
https://github.com/anonaddy/anonaddy.git
synced 2026-04-25 06:05:55 +03:00
[GH-ISSUE #164] Keys not matching #164
Labels
No labels
bug
pull-request
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
starred/anonaddy#164
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Originally created by @a7x-bit on GitHub (Jun 2, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/anonaddy/anonaddy/issues/164
Hi,
Can you explain why keys are not matching from mailer@annonaddy.me?
I am getting error
"Encrypted but end to end key did not match the sender"
@willbrowningme commented on GitHub (Jun 3, 2021):
This is because your email client is using the From: header to check the key's identity.
However the From: header on AnonAddy is set to the alias email address.
It would not be feasible to add every alias email addresss as an identity to the "mailer@anonaddy.me" signing key. It also isn't really feasible to create a new signing key for every single alias so that it matches.
At the moment I'm not sure if there is any solution for this, except for sending every single forwarded email from "mailer@anonaddy.me" but then this would break many users mail filters etc.
I will have a think and see if I can come up with anything.
@a7x-bit commented on GitHub (Jun 3, 2021):
Thanks. Basically, key identity has to match allias email to work. Maybe ok for few keys, I can see this being a issue.
@willbrowningme commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2022):
Closing this for now as there is no solution to this issue that I'm aware of that would allow emails to be forwarded from aliases whilst having an exact identity match for the signing key.
@xyhhx commented on GitHub (Feb 6, 2024):
Can you make this a configurable option? Then, along with the
Reply-To:header, a filter could probably be created