For security I had turned off passphrase caching, most likely.
Still repeating identical dialog boxes are very confusing to the user: What the previous passphrase wrong (re-enter), or is the passphrase required for a different purpose now?
Isn't it how phishing works (you have to enter some credentials, but you aren't sure what they are actually used for)?

Thank you for the patch. I've tried it in my environment, and gnupg 987c6a398a9505399b2c25a775d4b625753bc962 passes all its self-tests for me now!

Thank you, that did indeed fix the problem!

This overloading of "bold" for "my certificates", "qualified certificates" and "trusted root certificates" seems to exist since two decades. I stopped digging into ancient history at the commit that added the hard-coded default filters.

Take care: Too many attributes (color, font) are bad style.

a) "Prefer S/MIME" only applies to encryption, not decryption. If you do not want to decrypt with GpgOL you have to disable S/MIME in GpgOL.

Oh yeah, the mentioned patch is bogus because it assumes that fgets has already set the eof flag while reading the last line. This seems not to be the case.

Well, the qual flag should only be set for CAs dedicated to certifying QES certificates. And those should by definition be signature certificates only, afaik.

Backported for VSD 3.4

Done. Example (with default text in English and German translation):

[Welcome]
welcome-text[$i]=<h2>Hello, World!</h2>
welcome-text[$i][de]=<h2>Hallo, Welt!</h2>

Backported for VSD 3.4

This is actually a (known) bug in gpg, i.e. gpg --delete-secret-and-public-key PRIMARY_KEY_FPR only deletes the public key for keys without primary secret key.

Makes me wonder why they think they can use such a common word for a typedef without risking name clashes everywhere. Luckily, the helper function single is superfluous nowadays so that we can easily avoid the name clash.

AI scraper DoS --- sorry, we had to shut it down.

Ready for testing

Merged

Thank you for the log.

CVE-2026-24882 has been assigned to this issue.

Does following patch help?

I added the gpgsm log output (same error as in the gpg log)

Ah, thanks for the pointer, I did not expect gpgsm to behave differently here. Then it's probably intentional and I'll close this as invalid.