Enhanced mailgate

Hi,
I passed some time trying to make enh-mailgate working with PGP, without
success.
It seems that the version that is in contrib uses an old version of RT.
Typically, the method new RT::CurrentUser() take zero parameters and it
was written as new RT::CurrentUser(RT::SystemUser) in enh-mailgate.

Does anybody have enh-mailgate in daily use? What do you think needs to
be done to make it up-to-date to RT-2.0.2?

Thanks.
-jec

Jean-Eric Cuendet
Linkvest SA
Av des Baumettes 19, 1020 Renens Switzerland
Tel +41 21 632 9043 Fax +41 21 632 9090
http://www.linkvest.com E-mail: jean-eric.cuendet@linkvest.com

Jean-Eric Cuendet.vcf (178 Bytes)

Hi,
I passed some time trying to make enh-mailgate working with PGP, without
success.
It seems that the version that is in contrib uses an old version of RT.
Typically, the method new RT::CurrentUser() take zero parameters and it
was written as new RT::CurrentUser(RT::SystemUser) in enh-mailgate.

Actually, if you read the code, you’ll see that RT::CurrentUser->new can
optionally take an argument.

Does anybody have enh-mailgate in daily use? What do you think needs to
be done to make it up-to-date to RT-2.0.2?

Nothing substantive has changed between when enhanced-mailgate was written
and now. It should work fine with 2.0.2.

Thanks.
-jec


Jean-Eric Cuendet
Linkvest SA
Av des Baumettes 19, 1020 Renens Switzerland
Tel +41 21 632 9043 Fax +41 21 632 9090
http://www.linkvest.com E-mail: jean-eric.cuendet@linkvest.com

jesse reed vincent – root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
70EBAC90: 2A07 FC22 7DB4 42C1 9D71 0108 41A3 3FB3 70EB AC90

I have images of Marc in well worn combat fatigues, covered in mud,
sweat and blood, knife in one hand and PSION int he other, being
restrained by several other people, screaming “Let me at it!
Just let me at it!” Eichin standing calmly by with something
automated, milspec, and likely recoilless.
-xiphmont on opensource peer review

Hi,
Has anyone enhanced rt-mailgate working?
I try, I try, but… No success!

What’s the principles?

Are these assumptions correct:

  • Only PGP signed messages sent to enh-mailgate are allowed to contain
    commands
  • Commands are per example, “RT-status open” on the first line of the
    BODY to make the status of the ticket referenced in the subject
    ([example.com #123]) “open” (the ticket 123 in this example)

How does enh-mailgate knows the PGP keys of clients sending mails? Must
I put public keys somewhere? Or is it not necessary?

Thanks for help
-jec


Jean-Eric Cuendet
Linkvest SA
Av des Baumettes 19, 1020 Renens Switzerland
Tel +41 21 632 9043 Fax +41 21 632 9090
http://www.linkvest.com E-mail: jean-eric.cuendet@linkvest.com


Are these assumptions correct:

  • Only PGP signed messages sent to enh-mailgate are allowed to contain
    commands

For ticket updates, that’s true. For ticket creation, it doesn’t do GPG
ACL checking, since part of the point is to let requestors set ticket
fields

  • Commands are per example, “RT-status open” on the first line of the
    BODY to make the status of the ticket referenced in the subject
    ([example.com #123]) “open” (the ticket 123 in this example)

It should look like this:

RT-Ticket: 123
RT-Status: open

How does enh-mailgate knows the PGP keys of clients sending mails? Must
I put public keys somewhere? Or is it not necessary?

You need to set up gpg for the user that the mailgate will be running as
with those keys.

Thanks for help
-jec


Jean-Eric Cuendet
Linkvest SA
Av des Baumettes 19, 1020 Renens Switzerland
Tel +41 21 632 9043 Fax +41 21 632 9090
http://www.linkvest.com E-mail: jean-eric.cuendet@linkvest.com



rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

jesse reed vincent – root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
70EBAC90: 2A07 FC22 7DB4 42C1 9D71 0108 41A3 3FB3 70EB AC90

T’waS br|ll1G 4|||> 7#e sl1T#Y T0v3s D1|> gYR3 4nd Gimb@1 1|| 7#E //A83
all |/|1|/|53Y W3R3 d4 60r0GR0V3s @|||> |>4 M0MES wr47H oUTGR4b3.